Backlash against Harriet Tubman biopic.

[Frederick]

It started with the casting of Cynthia Erivo, who's a Nigerian British actress who used to post disparaging shit about Black Americans on Twitter.

https://www.complex.com/pop-culture...past-tweets-allegedly-mocking-black-americans

Erivo has been called out about this repeatedly, but has refused to apologize, and the film's producers have tried to gaslight people by claiming that the people complaining are xenophobic and sexist.


https://twitter.com/Variety/status/1189181341310451712?s=20



But it turns out that the real issue here is that the movie is trash.

The primary villains aren't the white slavemasters, it's a Black male bounty hunter named "Bigger Long," who acts like 21st century rapper, and is motivated to catch slaves so that he can pay for white prostitutes.

No bullshit, here's an actual clip from the movie:

https://streamable.com/z1rid

In case you were wondering, no, Black "bounty hunting" slave catchers did not exist in the antebellum South.




Also, the climax is Harriet being saved from "Bigger Long" by the son of her former master, who's portrayed as being secretly in love with her.


https://streamable.com/1q54u

Later in the film, she has a chance to kill him, but lets him live and forgives him.

So basically, they turned Harriet Tubman's story into a white savior narrative that demonizes Black men and pushes BW/WM IR.

Of course, the response from Black film critics, who've been lying about this being a good movie, is to chastise Black people for "not supporting Black women."



After reading about this crap on Twitter since the movie premiered, I honestly don't know whether to laugh or be angry. I literally did laugh at the scenes of "Bigger Long" that have been floating around on Twitter.


To top it off, the film's studio, which is owned by Comcast, is launching an attack on the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/koriha...ver-20-billion-entertainment-studios-lawsuit/


Just when you think that Hollyweird can't go any lower.

 

[Beasty]

LOL. Once again white Jesus saves the day, black men ain't shit and acceptable IR is wm and bw only......

Lettuce pray and bow to the white god for having mercy and loving us unworthy negroes.

 

[darkcurry]

The fact that they had to make up a black male character that never exist for them to have a black male villain tells you the direction they were trying to go with this movie and who it's for. That woman's response says it all. Black men are the boogeyman to them.

You know what was real. The Daughters Of The Slave Trade

Exposing how African women willingly marrying European slave traders because contrary to popular belief you couldn't just go into other people's land and kidnap people. Slavery was a business.

They won't make a movie about this unless they lie about most of the IR marriages between African women and European slave traders being an agreed upon union. And only make the African men who were selling slaves the bad guys. Because as we have seen even in biopics they are determined to make black men out to be the villains by way of making up characters that never exist. I can not believe they did this Harriet Tubman. Fortunately the movie is getting slammed and people are not falling for the bullshit, but there are still people out there like that lady Brittney that is determined to protect the faults of black women and even excuse them, feel sorry for bad white men but blame and condemn black men. No wonder there is no book this script is adapted from.

 

[darkcurry]

Another book I would to see adapted to the big screen is Illicit Love: Interracial Sex and Marriage

But they have already slammed the book for "fetishizing" black men. Even though unlike "Harriet" and just like Daughters Of The Trade these women made sure to have evidence and documents with no need to make things up. But it is that evidence as to why I would love to see these books adapted into movies. Both of these books were written by white women BTW.

 

[ColiBreh1]

Another book I would to see adapted to the big screen is Illicit Love: Interracial Sex and Marriage

But they have already slammed the book for "fetishizing" black men. Even though unlike "Harriet" and just like Daughters Of The Trade these women made sure to have evidence and documents with no need to make things up. But it is that evidence as to why I would love to see these books adapted into movies. Both of these books were written by white women BTW.

LOL, they have? I can only imagine what they think of J. A. Rogers' "Sex and Race" book series.

 

[darkcurry]

LOL, they have? I can imagine what they think of J. A. Rogers' "Sex and Race" book series.

I think I read that book before as well. Or it could've been another one I'm thinking about.

 

[ColiBreh1]

LOL, they have? I can only imagine what they think of J. A. Rogers' "Sex and Race" book series.

I think I read that book before as well. Or it could've been another one I'm thinking about.

J.A. Rogers' "Sex and Race" is 3-volume book series. Which of the 3 books did you read?

 

[darkcurry]

It's a J.A. Rogers' "Sex and Race" is 3-volume book series. Which of the 3 books did you read?

I can't remember right now, but it was one of them or another book.

 

[RicardoCooper]

These are the same people who went in hard to sabotage Nate Parker's "Birth of a Nation" because Nate is married to the dreaded wHiTe wOman.

Brittney Cooper a.k.a. "Professor Crunk" is the same one who blames Trump for her obesity

https://pluralist.com/brittney-cooper-obesity-trump/

When I saw Janelle Monae was in the movie, I thought they'd try to shoehorn in some LGBT angle i.e. Harriet was an undercover lesbian, I'm shocked they didn't go that way for the full intersectionality angle

Review lukewarm at best

https://variety.com/2019/film/reviews/harriet-review-cynthia-erivo-1203330489/#article-comments

They can keep this trash. We "akatas" ain't going for it. Watch "Birth of a Nation" or "Django Unchained" again instead

Thanks for this topic Brother Freddy!

 

[meowkittenmeow]

Welp...

 

[Soulthinker]

LOL, they have? I can only imagine what they think of J. A. Rogers' "Sex and Race" book series.

Hope to read that book especially the part of the brothers in Oz.

 

[Soulthinker]

J.A. Rogers' "Sex and Race" is 3-volume book series. Which of the 3 books did you read?

Read all 3 Volumes. Loved it.

 

[Frederick]

These are the same people who went in hard to sabotage Nate Parker's "Birth of a Nation" because Nate is married to the dreaded wHiTe wOman.

Brittney Cooper a.k.a. "Professor Crunk" is the same one who blames Trump for her obesity

https://pluralist.com/brittney-cooper-obesity-trump/

When I saw Janelle Monae was in the movie, I thought they'd try to shoehorn in some LGBT angle i.e. Harriet was an undercover lesbian, I'm shocked they didn't go that way for the full intersectionality angle

Review lukewarm at best

https://variety.com/2019/film/reviews/harriet-review-cynthia-erivo-1203330489/#article-comments

They can keep this trash. We "akatas" ain't going for it. Watch "Birth of a Nation" or "Django Unchained" again instead

Thanks for this topic Brother Freddy!

Britney Cooper is delusional. Look at her justification for the inclusion of a totally ahistorical Black male villain.




There ain't no Black "patriarchy" in the US now. There sure are hell wasn't one during slavery. These idiots trying to cut-and-paste third wave white feminism and splice it into Black history are insane.

 

[darkcurry]

Britney Cooper is delusional. Look at her justification for the inclusion of a totally ahistorical Black male villain.

View attachment 7180


There ain't no Black "patriarchy" in the US now. There are hell wasn't one during slavery. These idiots trying to cut-and-paste third wave white feminism and splice it into Black history are insane.

No entire race is a villain or a hero. But get it right when you are talking about events that actually took place and not try and add an event to it that never took place to try and prove that point. Because we all know during those times about the house slaves and the black mistresses and as I have pointed out the daughters of the trade. They actually existed. Black bounty hunters especially THIS black bounty hunter never existed. She said the film didn't need the character. You damn right the film didn't need the character because he never existed. lol.


Like I said if they ever made a movie about those books I mentioned especially "Daughters Of The Trade" they would be angry but in those books the authors used facts and events that took place so they would be mad about the truth.

There is a reason why Harriet isn't based on a book because they probably would've got sued for this. Because that event and black bounty hunters aren't in any books based on Harriet Tubman.

Remember the outrage people had about Dakota Fanning's new film Sweetness In The Belly? First of all I bet the same people mad about that are the same ones defending this film. But unlike Harriet this movie Sweetness In The Belly is based off a novel and have actually got the events right. And there are white women like Dakota's character that were adopted by Muslim parents and of course raised to be Muslim; which are one of the things that inspired the book by Camilla Gibb.

But they were mad about this movie and it started with the media incorrectly calling her character a Ethiopian woman which led to people incorrectly calling it whitewashing even after Dakota Fanning corrected that incorrect article. People kept hitting these people with facts about the movie and they just kept ignoring those facts and continued to go after it. Same people are now defending a movie that fictionalized a black male villain and made a white slave owner "misunderstood".

It's a shame that when I looked at the Rotten Tomatoes score that this movie have a lower rating than Harriet but there aren't many critics that have seen the movie and most of the critics that tore it down have praised Harriet in another review including @blackgirlnerds. But it does score higher than Harriet on IMDB.

But it just goes to show that facts only matter to people when it makes them feel comfortable and people love illusions that makes them feel better about themselves.

 

[Frederick]

No entire race is a villain or a hero. But get it right when you are talking about events that actually took place and not try and add an event to it that never took place to try and prove that point. Because we all know during those times about the house slaves and the black mistresses and as I have pointed out the daughters of the trade. They actually existed. Black bounty hunters especially THIS black bounty hunter never existed. She said the film didn't need the character. You damn right the film didn't need the character because he never existed. lol.


Like I said if they ever made a movie about those books I mentioned especially "Daughters Of The Trade" they would be angry but in those books the authors used facts and events that took place so they would be mad about the truth.

There is a reason why Harriet isn't based on a book because they probably would've got sued for this. Because that event and black bounty hunters aren't in any books based on Harriet Tubman.

Remember the outrage people had about Dakota Fanning's new film Sweetness In The Belly? First of all I bet the same people mad about that are the same ones defending this film. But unlike Harriet this movie Sweetness In The Belly is based off a novel and have actually got the events right. And there are white women like Dakota's character that were adopted by Muslim parents and of course raised to be Muslim; which are one of the things that inspired the book by Camilla Gibb.

But they were mad about this movie and it started with the media incorrectly calling her character a Ethiopian woman which led to people incorrectly calling it whitewashing even after Dakota Fanning corrected that incorrect article. People kept hitting these people with facts about the movie and they just kept ignoring those facts and continued to go after it. Same people are now defending a movie that fictionalized a black male villain and made a white slave owner "misunderstood".

It's a shame that when I looked at the Rotten Tomatoes score that this movie have a lower rating than Harriet but there aren't many critics that have seen the movie and most of the critics that tore it down have praised Harriet in another review including @blackgirlnerds. But it does score higher than Harriet on IMDB.

But it just goes to show that facts only matter to people when it makes them feel comfortable and people love illusions that makes them feel better about themselves.

The supporters of Harriet kept telling people to shut up and save their outrage until they saw the movie. They also blatantly lied about the white savior angle and the big villain being a Black male.

I guarantee to you that the people complaining about Sweetness in the Belly didn't know shit about that movie before they started their bullshit hashtage activism besides the fact that there was a white actress in the lead.


Anyway, Kasi Lemmons, the director, is getting roasted right now.


https://twitter.com/hashtag/KasiLemmonsMovies?src=hashtag_click

This is the funniest shit that I've seen since that Root articles hashtag.

 

[meowkittenmeow]

Britney Cooper is delusional. Look at her justification for the inclusion of a totally ahistorical Black male villain.

View attachment 7180


There ain't no Black "patriarchy" in the US now. There sure are hell wasn't one during slavery. These idiots trying to cut-and-paste third wave white feminism and splice it into Black history are insane.

You can’t expect anything accurate from feminists, buddy.

 

[darkcurry]

The supporters of Harriet kept telling people to shut up and save their outrage until they saw the movie. They also blatantly lied about the white savior angle and the big villain being a Black male.

I guarantee to you that the people complaining about Sweetness in the Belly didn't know shit about that movie before they started their bullshit hashtage activism besides the fact that there was a white actress in the lead.


Anyway, Kasi Lemmons, the director, is getting roasted right now.


https://twitter.com/hashtag/KasiLemmonsMovies?src=hashtag_click

This is the funniest shit that I've seen since that Root articles hashtag.


View attachment 7181 View attachment 7182 View attachment 7183 View attachment 7184

That 2nd person's joke deserves a side eye. lol.

 

[ColiBreh1]

It started with the casting of Cynthia Erivo, who's a Nigerian British actress who used to post disparaging shit about Black Americans on Twitter.

https://www.complex.com/pop-culture...past-tweets-allegedly-mocking-black-americans

Erivo has been called out about this repeatedly, but has refused to apologize, and the film's producers have tried to gaslight people by claiming that the people complaining are xenophobic and sexist.


https://twitter.com/Variety/status/1189181341310451712?s=20



But it turns out that the real issue here is that the movie is trash.

The primary villains aren't the white slavemasters, it's a Black male bounty hunter named "Bigger Long," who acts like 21st century rapper, and is motivated to catch slaves so that he can pay for white prostitutes.

No bullshit, here's an actual clip from the movie:

https://streamable.com/z1rid

In case you were wondering, no, Black "bounty hunting" slave catchers did not exist in the antebellum South.

View attachment 7179


Also, the climax is Harriet being saved from "Bigger Long" by the son of her former master, who's portrayed as being secretly in love with her.


https://streamable.com/1q54u

Later in the film, she has a chance to kill him, but lets him live and forgives him.

So basically, they turned Harriet Tubman's story into a white savior narrative that demonizes Black men and pushes BW/WM IR.

Of course, the response from Black film critics, who've been lying about this being a good movie, is to chastise Black people for "not supporting Black women."

View attachment 7178

After reading about this crap on Twitter since the movie premiered, I honestly don't know whether to laugh or be angry. I literally did laugh at the scenes of "Bigger Long" that have been floating around on Twitter.


To top it off, the film's studio, which is owned by Comcast, is launching an attack on the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/koriha...ver-20-billion-entertainment-studios-lawsuit/


Just when you think that Hollyweird can't go any lower.

No entire race is a villain or a hero. But get it right when you are talking about events that actually took place and not try and add an event to it that never took place to try and prove that point. Because we all know during those times about the house slaves and the black mistresses and as I have pointed out the daughters of the trade. They actually existed. Black bounty hunters especially THIS black bounty hunter never existed. She said the film didn't need the character. You damn right the film didn't need the character because he never existed. lol.


Like I said if they ever made a movie about those books I mentioned especially "Daughters Of The Trade" they would be angry but in those books the authors used facts and events that took place so they would be mad about the truth.

There is a reason why Harriet isn't based on a book because they probably would've got sued for this. Because that event and black bounty hunters aren't in any books based on Harriet Tubman.

Remember the outrage people had about Dakota Fanning's new film Sweetness In The Belly? First of all I bet the same people mad about that are the same ones defending this film. But unlike Harriet this movie Sweetness In The Belly is based off a novel and have actually got the events right. And there are white women like Dakota's character that were adopted by Muslim parents and of course raised to be Muslim; which are one of the things that inspired the book by Camilla Gibb.

But they were mad about this movie and it started with the media incorrectly calling her character a Ethiopian woman which led to people incorrectly calling it whitewashing even after Dakota Fanning corrected that incorrect article. People kept hitting these people with facts about the movie and they just kept ignoring those facts and continued to go after it. Same people are now defending a movie that fictionalized a black male villain and made a white slave owner "misunderstood".

It's a shame that when I looked at the Rotten Tomatoes score that this movie have a lower rating than Harriet but there aren't many critics that have seen the movie and most of the critics that tore it down have praised Harriet in another review including @blackgirlnerds. But it does score higher than Harriet on IMDB.

But it just goes to show that facts only matter to people when it makes them feel comfortable and people love illusions that makes them feel better about themselves.

Bruh, when people have agendas, facts don't matter! This reminds me of how much people were whining about the "erasure of BW" in the 2017 film "Detroit" just because the 2 main female characters were white, even though those 2 female characters were also white in real life too. Not only did you have idiots on social media whining about this, you had famous black folks who work in the media, like Jemele Hill, whining about this on ESPN. Let's not forget the same type outrage happened with the movie "Red Tails".

 

[ColiBreh1]

https://twitter.com/CurtisScoon/status/1191011741272018950

OK I can see this movie was made for a certain crowd.

 

[meowkittenmeow]

https://twitter.com/CurtisScoon/status/1191011741272018950

OK I can see this movie was made for a certain crowd.

I think they want one half of us to be drones who wear dresses and say yas, they want the other half to be drones who do thug shit and only have sex with them.