by - bride_of_cthulhu on Mon Feb 4 2008 10:09:42
I was actually thinking the same thing. It seemed like the director relied on a traditional "savage" stereotype -- apelike, dark-skinned, grunting etc. -- which can easily be interpreted as racist, esp. since they are called subhumans. I found it problematic but it didn't affect the experience much for me; I still loved the film!
When I saw it as a kid I simply didn't get the whole racism thing. I mean Nekron's the whitest of everyone in the film, and he thinks he's better than everyone.
The dark-skinned savage, in retrospect (and with a more educated mind), is highly unfortunate. It would have been more thoughtful had they been one of many groups Nekron had conquered and used as minions/soldiers for his own ends. I can almost see a race of "Nekron" like people who are also savages and trying to wreak havoc on the southern folks as a good addition or alternative to what was portrayed.
Upon my initial viewing it simply never occurred to me that there might be a racist agenda operating. Me, I grew up reading books on anthropology and human ancestry, in addition to all the other natural science books I read. And to me racism is a really wacky and outlandish idea. One that feeds on skewed perceptions. We went through all those social movements in the 60s, led by the arts (film makers included), so why would film makers use a tool that is racist to tell a story? Ergo the thought never occurred to me.
So, when I saw the film, I saw the neanderthals as, well, neanderthals, and not really a "different race" as such. That is they weren't animals, but just some people who'd fallen into bad company with Nekron. And I certainly didn't see them as dark-skinned people in the way that term is used in our contemporary modern vernacular. In spite of their lack of social evolution, making them more pliable for Nekron, I didn't even see them as sub-human. I truly didn't.
Now that I'm middle aged, I'm more in tune with sensitivities, and yeah, I can see where someone would point out a racist perspective, but I'm still not sure that it was intended as malicious. Like you said, it was an unfortunate story device. And in that regard, yeah, I can see people calling it racist.
But heck, wasn't Dark Wolf supposed to be of a shade of skin darker than Larn or Teegra's tribes? And wasn't the other evil white person that lesbian witch, who was many shades more pale than the "good guys"?
I don't know, I see the argument's merit, but I still think it's silly. I guess if another film is made some more advanced humans of all shades can be the good guys.
reply
share