Both French-Dahomey wars resulted in a French victory. In both wars the Africans lost thousands while the French lost less than 100. Are they really making a movie about such crushing defeats or are they going to put their own little twist on the truth?
shareThe Dahomey were also heavily involved in the slave trades and would take over neighboring tribes. I doubt there will be much accuracy but “historical” films rarely are accurate.
shareWell, here's the kick: if they make it accurate they might be branded as racists for portraying blacks in such negative images.
Most likely they will paint them as noble and brave victims and the French as evil, filthy colonialists, a la Prey.
Yesterday's imdb review:
This was not even close to being historically accurate. That's ok. https://www.imdb.com/review/rw8535935/?ref_=tt_urv
Here is the summery from it's front page on IMDb:
A historical epic that is based in alternate history of The Kingdom of Dahomey, one of the most powerful states of Africa in the 18th and 19th centuries.
alternate history
Instead of pretending to be "based on a true story" like some other historical films? :)
shareThere is no alternate history there is history.
So it is made up. So fiction
based on a true story
A historical epic that is based in alternate history
If they are depicted as part of the slave trade, then they are bad. Or do you think there is some sort of redeeming quality in being a slaver?
It seems you will be content with making up your own review that is based upon anything other than watching the film yourself.
"Alternate history" is a form of speculative fiction in which some historical events occur.
If they are depicted as part of the slave trade, then they are bad. Or do you think there is some sort of redeeming quality in being a slaver?
"With its epic tale of the solidarity that grows between the Dahomey as they battle against enslavement and exploitation, The Woman King illustrates, with stunning grace, how sisterhood can be more than dangerous and powerful."
You're preaching to the choir here. A alternate history of a slaver. You're the only one using the word hero. You're looking for a fight in your last post where they isn't one.
When two groups of people battle each other with the losers ending up dead or slaves, you can bet that both sides are fighting against being enslaved themselves. Is that reviewer actually claiming that the Dahmey are trying to end slavery?
You're the only one using the word hero
"If they are depicted as part of the slave trade, then they are bad."
Wanna bet that they will be depicted as fighting slavery and the evil whites?
I can bet you haven't even seen the trailer. It's in the first seconds :P
"The fictional white Portuguese-speaking slave trader Santo Ferreira is portrayed as an enemy to Ghezo. According to "History vs. Hollywood", the character was "possibly loosely inspired" by Francisco Félix de Sousa, a Brazilian slave trader who in actuality helped Ghezo gain power."
If they are depicted as fighting slavery, it will probably be fighting against their own enslavement. But I'm willing to wait to see the film prior to declaring what actually happens.
shareIf they are depicted as fighting slavery, it will probably be fighting against their own enslavement.
So you're saying the Dahomey went willingly into slavery because they were not fighting against being enslaved themselves? You're not making any sense at all.
shareOh you really that stupid or just trolling. You can't be that stupid
So you're saying the Dahomey went willingly into slavery
A person can fight to resist being put into slavery. I did not claim the Dahomey were trying to end it in Africa.
The Dahomey sold or traded their slaves to others for goods like weapons. Those slaves made it to other countries when traded to others. This means there were other slavers beside the Dahomey.
I okay if you ignore me, you coward.
A person can fight to resist being put into slavery
I did not claim the Dahomey were trying to end it in Africa.
The Dahomey sold or traded their slaves to others for goods like weapons. Those slaves made it to other countries when traded to others. This means there were other slavers beside the Dahomey.
I okay if you ignore me, you coward.
If I'm going to quote you, then I will use the quote function or say that you said it. Stop being a snowflake.
Yes, the Dahomey were slavers, who is saying they were not?
When I said the Dahomey sold slaves, it means something different than when you say they sold slaves? What part of "they sold slaves" do you not understand?
So are you saying the people the Dahomey sold slaves to were not part of the slave trade?
If I'm going to quote you, then I will use the quote function or say that you said it. Stop being a snowflake.
Yes, the Dahomey were slavers, who is saying they were not?
So are you saying the people the Dahomey sold slaves to were not part of the slave trade?
A historical epic that is based in WE WUZ KANGZ of The Kingdom of Dahomey, one of the most powerful states of Africa in the 18th and 19th centuries. < - Fixed
shareWhat'd you fix?? Because it still says exactly what I quoted in my comment. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
https://i.ibb.co/f2G31HQ/Screenshot-20220914-212140.png
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt8093700