"Roots"

[MarcATL]

Did you guys watch it? Did you watch the first one? Which one you prefer? Thoughts?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

 

[Michelle420]

Only watched the first one.

 

[hjmick]

Watched the new one, it was okay but I prefer the original. Probably because of the spectacle it was at the time and I think the cast was better.

The new one certainly was grittier, and like the original with Sandy Duncan the new one also had a terrible performance in the form of Anna Paquin... Forrest Whitaker is no Lou Gossett Jr.

I'll keep the original in my DVD library, skip buying the new one...

 

[Blackrook]

Given that TV is not a good source of accurate history, it is not a good idea to watch this show and think that anything you are watching reflects what really happened during the days of slavery.

In the 1930's, when Hollywood was pro-South, slavery was almost always portrayed as a benevolent institution, with happy-go-lucky darkies working for generous and kind-hearted white masters. Gone With The Wind portrayed slavery this way, and the North was portrayed as an evil aggressor for forcibly ending this "civilized" way of life.

The current Hollywood line that all blacks were miserable and beaten, and that all whites were cruel, heartless, abusive taskmasters who mercilessly whipped their slaves, is as much as a lie as the previous pro-slavery portrayal. I'm not saying that slavery is ever a good thing, but exaggerating and lying about slavery does not serve the greater truth, which is that slavery is always wrong even if the masters are trying their best to be good masters, and the slaves are happy in their enslaved condition.

And that's because slavery perpetuates the idea that a human being can ever be legally or morally treated as anything less than a human being, with full human rights, inalienable, endowed by our Creator, and guaranteed in the United States Constitution. The ideals of the Declaration of Independence, written by slave owner Thomas Jefferson, was the death knell of slavery. What it proves is that though the some of the Founding Fathers owned slaves, they knew it was wrong, and what's more important, they knew that slavery was a violation of everything the American Revolution stood for.

So what Roots is going to offer is "slavery porn." It will show black people getting beaten to an inch of their lives, and white people doing the whipping, and none of it will get us any closer to the answer we seek, which is that all human beings, regardless of age, sex, race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or status as born or unborn, is entitled to full rights under the U.S. Constitution, since we are all fully human and children of God. When Hollywood starts tackling current injustices, like abortion, with the bravery it tackles injustices that have already been resolved, then I will be impressed.

 

[Gracie]

I watched the first episode and when Kunta started talking of wanting to go to University with a british accent, I knew the rest was bullshit. And it was. I didn't bother with the rest of it.

 

[Blackrook]

I watched the first episode and when Kunta started talking of wanting to go to University with a british accent, I knew the rest was bullshit. And it was. I didn't bother with the rest of it.

Wow, that sounds pretty bad.

 

[Asclepias]

Did you guys watch it? Did you watch the first one? Which one you prefer? Thoughts?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

I'm glad to see you beat me to this. i initially was not going to watch it but my oldest daughter talked me into it. I thought it was excellent. I liked the first one but I think this most recent one is better. I loved the emphasis on the vibrant West African culture that was already in existence. My daughter remembers me holding up her younger sisters to the stars and was really appreciative of me teaching her what I knew about our African history.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I watched the first episode and when Kunta started talking of wanting to go to University with a british accent, I knew the rest was bullshit. And it was. I didn't bother with the rest of it.

Wow, that sounds pretty bad.

Gracie brought this up in another thread and disappeared when I told her that Africa had higher education in the past.

Also if you believe they hired an actor to play an African and spoke it with an English accent. Uh, just don't believe it. You can Google any clip and see for yourself that's not true.

 

[ClosedCaption]

It was a great retelling tho. The actors and production value was high. Very well done.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The current Hollywood line that all blacks were miserable and beaten, and that all whites were cruel, heartless, abusive taskmasters who mercilessly whipped their slaves, is as much as a lie as the previous pro-slavery portrayal.

Good, I know right here that you didn't watch it because all aspects were covered. From the nice slave master to the mean SOB.

Amazing how people keep having opinions on something they didn't see.

 

[Asclepias]

I watched the first episode and when Kunta started talking of wanting to go to University with a british accent, I knew the rest was bullshit. And it was. I didn't bother with the rest of it.

British accent? You must not know the difference between a british accent and a African accent. You do realize Timbuktu was the most prestigious university in the world at one point dont you? That empire also produced the wealthiest human to ever walk the planet.

 

[Asclepias]

Given that TV is not a good source of accurate history, it is not a good idea to watch this show and think that anything you are watching reflects what really happened during the days of slavery.

In the 1930's, when Hollywood was pro-South, slavery was almost always portrayed as a benevolent institution, with happy-go-lucky darkies working for generous and kind-hearted white masters. Gone With The Wind portrayed slavery this way, and the North was portrayed as an evil aggressor for forcibly ending this "civilized" way of life.

The current Hollywood line that all blacks were miserable and beaten, and that all whites were cruel, heartless, abusive taskmasters who mercilessly whipped their slaves, is as much as a lie as the previous pro-slavery portrayal. I'm not saying that slavery is ever a good thing, but exaggerating and lying about slavery does not serve the greater truth, which is that slavery is always wrong even if the masters are trying their best to be good masters, and the slaves are happy in their enslaved condition.

And that's because slavery perpetuates the idea that a human being can ever be legally or morally treated as anything less than a human being, with full human rights, inalienable, endowed by our Creator, and guaranteed in the United States Constitution. The ideals of the Declaration of Independence, written by slave owner Thomas Jefferson, was the death knell of slavery. What it proves is that though the some of the Founding Fathers owned slaves, they knew it was wrong, and what's more important, they knew that slavery was a violation of everything the American Revolution stood for.

So what Roots is going to offer is "slavery porn." It will show black people getting beaten to an inch of their lives, and white people doing the whipping, and none of it will get us any closer to the answer we seek, which is that all human beings, regardless of age, sex, race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or status as born or unborn, is entitled to full rights under the U.S. Constitution, since we are all fully human and children of God. When Hollywood starts tackling current injustices, like abortion, with the bravery it tackles injustices that have already been resolved, then I will be impressed.

Typical of white people to plead with Black people to not learn about their history. They get all defensive and the old inferiority complex starts kicking in. They showed cruel slave masters and they showed "nice" slave masters. I think the point is that no matter how "nice" they were they still owned slaves and thought they were superior to slaves.

 

[Gracie]

Gracie brought this up in another thread and disappeared when I told her that Africa had higher education in the past.

I'm sure they did have smarts. But back then, most tribes damn sure were not talking about going to University and riding off in a huff from dad, on an arabian stallion. It's a crock of shit and most know it.

 

[Gracie]

Amazing how people keep having opinions on something they didn't see.

A movie. Made in hollywood. Did you see first hand the slaves of that time of kunta kinte? Nope.

 

[Asclepias]

Gracie brought this up in another thread and disappeared when I told her that Africa had higher education in the past.

I'm sure they did have smarts. But back then, most tribes damn sure were not talking about going to University and riding off in a huff from dad, on an arabian stallion. It's a crock of shit and most know it.

Who do you think went to the University of Sankore? it was predominantly Black west africans as students and teachers.

Sankore Madrasah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"By the end of Mansa Musa's reign (early 14th century CE), the Sankoré Masjid had been converted into a fully staffed Madrassa (Islamic school or in this case university) with the largest collections of books in Africa since the Library of Alexandria. The level of learning at Timbuktu's Sankoré University was superior to that of many other Islamic centers in the world. The Sankoré Masjid was capable of housing 25,000 students and had one of the largest libraries in the world with between 400,000 to 700,000 manuscripts.[2]"

 

[MikeK]

Given that TV is not a good source of accurate history, it is not a good idea to watch this show and think that anything you are watching reflects what really happened during the days of slavery.

In the 1930's, when Hollywood was pro-South, slavery was almost always portrayed as a benevolent institution, with happy-go-lucky darkies working for generous and kind-hearted white masters. Gone With The Wind portrayed slavery this way, and the North was portrayed as an evil aggressor for forcibly ending this "civilized" way of life.

The current Hollywood line that all blacks were miserable and beaten, and that all whites were cruel, heartless, abusive taskmasters who mercilessly whipped their slaves, is as much as a lie as the previous pro-slavery portrayal. I'm not saying that slavery is ever a good thing, but exaggerating and lying about slavery does not serve the greater truth, which is that slavery is always wrong even if the masters are trying their best to be good masters, and the slaves are happy in their enslaved condition.

And that's because slavery perpetuates the idea that a human being can ever be legally or morally treated as anything less than a human being, with full human rights, inalienable, endowed by our Creator, and guaranteed in the United States Constitution. The ideals of the Declaration of Independence, written by slave owner Thomas Jefferson, was the death knell of slavery. What it proves is that though the some of the Founding Fathers owned slaves, they knew it was wrong, and what's more important, they knew that slavery was a violation of everything the American Revolution stood for.

So what Roots is going to offer is "slavery porn." It will show black people getting beaten to an inch of their lives, and white people doing the whipping, and none of it will get us any closer to the answer we seek, which is that all human beings, regardless of age, sex, race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or status as born or unborn, is entitled to full rights under the U.S. Constitution, since we are all fully human and children of God. When Hollywood starts tackling current injustices, like abortion, with the bravery it tackles injustices that have already been resolved, then I will be impressed.

Very well said!

I watched the first episode of what clearly is an opportunistic effort to generate box-office profits while rubbing salt on an old wound and I thought it was a poorly crafted, poorly performed, often absurd waste of time. But I'm sure it will be a hit with a lot of mainly young Blacks who already are indoctrinated with hatred for Whites and undoubtedly will provoke a substantial increase in what already is a serious rate of Black on White crime.

Having read a few very good historical accounts of the slavery era in America and having watched several extremely well-made movies and televised documentaries of that shamefully cruel practice I feel justified in dismissing this amateurish production as comic-book level trash.

 

[Gracie]

What they did was make it seem as though africa was not a 3rd world country, and the people of tribes wanted to go to University...whereas most didn't even fucking know what a university is. Nor did they ride arabian stallions willy nilly thru the african countryside. On top of that, they completely skimmed over the inner warring of each tribe and the greed or corruptness of the winning tribe in a war was to sell off their captors to the white guys ready to buy.
MOST tribes have their own intelligence factors but let's face it....most were running around with bones in their hair and they damn sure didn't have stallions to prance around on. Zulu's were heavy duty warriors...they didn't use horses in battle. And their shields were from cow or zebra skin on tree bark. But kunta wanted to go to University? Pahlease.

And all those young target black folks all pissed off on what happened 200/300 years ago with slavery? I guess they forgot about Amistad.

And you are right Mike. The whole movie was about generating profits, riling up pissed off black folks that still are pissed off, ignoring history as it happened and just want to show just how horrible whities were to blacks to keep the proverbial ball rolling into more chaos.

In short...it sucked. It was bullshit. And it was indeed an awful time but so was the holocaust, so was pot pol, so was rome, so was...(insert evil here____________).

 

[MarathonMike]

I don't have any interest in seeing the new one. The first one was excellent, well acted and well written.

 

[Gracie]

First one was very good. And closer to actual history. Second one is fantasy land.

 

[MikeK]

What they did was make it seem as though africa was not a 3rd world country, and the people of tribes wanted to go to University...whereas most didn't even fucking know what a university is. Nor did they ride arabian stallions willy nilly thru the african countryside. On top of that, they completely skimmed over the inner warring of each tribe and the greed or corruptness of the winning tribe in a war was to sell off their captors to the white guys ready to buy.
MOST tribes have their own intelligence factors but let's face it....most were running around with bones in their hair and they damn sure didn't have stallions to prance around on. Zulu's were heavy duty warriors...they didn't use horses in battle. And their shields were from cow or zebra skin on tree bark. But kunta wanted to go to University? Pahlease.

And all those young target black folks all pissed off on what happened 200/300 years ago with slavery? I guess they forgot about Amistad.

And you are right Mike. The whole movie was about generating profits, riling up pissed off black folks that still are pissed off, ignoring history as it happened and just want to show just how horrible whities were to blacks to keep the proverbial ball rolling into more chaos.

In short...it sucked. It was bullshit. And it was indeed an awful time but so was the holocaust, so was pot pol, so was rome, so was...(insert evil here____________).

One thing that stands out about low-level treatments of this highly sensitive topic is way all Whites are casually stereotyped as brutally sadistic, when in fact if that were true slavery quite likely would still exist in this Country -- or there would have been a genocidal effort that would make the Nazi attempt seem amateurish. The truth is many Whites vocally opposed the practice of slavery, hundreds became social pariah because of their opposition, some lost their lives because of it, most notably John Brown and his sons. But these humanistic Whites are ignored in this cheap fictional propaganda film.

What I have to say to the Roots cheering section is were it not for slavery they wouldn't exist, or they would be living in mud huts, subsisting on rat soup and hoping their neighbor wouldn't steal their clothes off the wash-line.

Yes, slavery was a terribly cruel practice. But its true nature cannot be judged today by the standards of the 1600s. Africa is the birthplace of slavery, where it is practiced there in some places even today. It was exported to America by Black Africans -- but it was never accepted or approved of by most White people.

Movies like Roots should point that out.