gon' head and burn that christmas list and pull yo damn pants up!

The Black Candle changed how I think about Kwanzaa in the best way possible. The film was heartwarming and full of Black/African history. It should make the African diaspora, especially in America, proud of who they are and who they could become. I loved how the movie features regular people who show how Kwanzaa is relevant to their lives. It’s inspiring.

 I feel like people aren’t attracted to Kwanzaa because it’s not rooted in vice and capitalism and has a lot of depth. No one talks about getting drunk or high to go to a Kwanzaa party. Could you imagine the economic debacle that Kwanzaa would cause? Children aren’t receiving the latest video game system or fancy clothes on Kwanzaa. Kwanzaa is anti-capitalist, and America is disgusted with anything that doesn’t feed capitalism.

 There’s less spectacle surrounding Kwanzaa. I’m not saying that people shouldn’t have fun, but America doesn’t inspire citizens to critically reflect on their place in life to any degree like Kwanzaa does. Christmas doesn’t hold much weight, and it’s mainly about buying and receiving gifts. There are Christmas parties where vices such as alcohol are encouraged. Kwanzaa is more focused on how community and prosperity will help Black/African people resist colonialism so that they may thrive. It’s not a thoughtless holiday that just requires some expensive gifts and a dirty ass Christmas ham to celebrate.

 I bet if America, or the world, could make money off Kwanzaa, they probably would’ve started it by now, just like they make money off Black art forms such as hip-hop. If they started making money off it, it would no longer be Kwanzaa because Kwanzaa isn’t about profit.

 Honestly, I don’t even want Kwanzaa to become popular even amongst Black people. Next thing you know, there will be twerk contests in the spirit of Kwanzaa. I guess an ass-shaking contest would be aligned with Umoja (Unity), right? Black people love coming together to shake ass. Maybe that’s not a bad thing.

 See, now, I’m wondering if Kwanzaa could be suppressive in a way. The principles of Kwanzaa are encouraging and loving, but I wonder if it extends to even the most marginalized Black people like those in the queer and trans communities. Would they be frowned upon by the Black people who regularly celebrate Kwanzaa, or would they be celebrated? Could they show up to these Kwanzaa celebrations authentically as themselves? Since Kwanzaa emphasizes unity, self-determination, and creativity, doesn’t that mean Kwanzaa practitioners are naturally, radically accepting of different types of Black people?

 There shouldn’t be any room for any type of bigotry or phobias in Kwanzaa, right? Maybe just a little arachnophobia because some spiders are venomous!

 I would tell people who aren’t being accepted into Kwanzaa celebrations to simply create their own like they always do, but Kwanzaa is supposed to be about togetherness, so that would just contradict everything that Kwanzaa stands for.  

 Well, anyway, to hell with Santa Claus. Let me put on my Dashiki. I hope I don’t get fried chicken crumbs on it.

shaking that ass for the highest bidder

On the surface, Shakedown might seem like it’s just a random documentary about Black exotic dancers at an underground lesbian club. Still, like most things in life, it’s full of complexities that should make the audience think more critically about the social conditions of others.

 It was great to see women having so much power and agency over their bodies. However, they still have to cater to the male gaze. One of the dancers commented that one of the men told her that she was wifey material. She hated that because she thought that would mean less lust from men at the bar, which would eventually lead to less money earned for her.

 Marginalized groups have to go to great lengths to create spaces for themselves. We all desire pleasure in some kind of form, and sexual pleasure is no different than someone finding pleasure in exploring a museum.

 Egypt, one of the main dancers in the documentary, was violently homophobic until she was exposed to lesbian culture and also experienced how profitable it is. This shows you that sexuality might not be as stationary as dominant thought would like for us to believe. I think many people know this, and that’s why they are afraid of the increase in non-heterosexual content being represented in the media. They realize how fluid sexuality truly is and are afraid of being influenced. Also, I think queerness was just something that Ayesha was suppressing all this time.

 Egypt also told a story about how a young fan was beaten by their mother for being a lesbian. The fan was a young girl who was caught admiring Egypt, and she was beaten by her mother, a mother who was said to be gay once upon a time. Homophobia has such a stronghold on many that even reformed homosexuals don’t have any grace for their homosexual children. Maybe the mother was frustrated because she knew her daughter would be further ostracized by the world for being a lesbian, so she would rather beat it out of her than have the daughter experience life as a lesbian. If that’s the case, why not use that fear or protection of your child to advocate for your daughter instead of trying to beat her identity out of her? Does this not sound like European colonizers trying to beat the African identity out of enslaved Africans on the Indigenous land that we now call America?

 You all really think that swinging a belt or switch is going to stop that baby girl of yours from daydreaming about kissing and falling in love with Sanaa Lathan? Yeah, right. It might prevent her from physically acting on her desires, but she’ll still crave the sweet taste of the vagina and cherry lip gloss of a woman because sexuality starts in the mind. Yes, I know all women don’t wear lip gloss or have vaginas. Leave me alone, and keep reading! 

 You can’t have Black fun without the police somehow getting involved. I don’t think I quite got all the details, but I know the owner of the building mentioned something about them (the creators of the Shakedown events) not using the rental space as agreed, so he called the police to help shut the event down. I bet it was because he was fed up with the homosexual activity or the hood element of it all. I can’t imagine a gala filled with White elites, a wine I can’t afford, and some chicken breasts seasoned with lint.

 Capitalism is so ubiquitous that it will make a person sexually fluid. The sexuality of all the dancers was not revealed. Still, suppose Egypt, who was previously straight, was intrigued by the culture of the Shakedown, especially its financial potential. In that case, I know those other girls could possibly be straight or previously straight, too. You can’t even have fun in this society without spending some money. Non-wealthy people aren’t making enough money as it is in metropolitan areas like LA, and now they have to spend money to be in safe, Black lesbian spaces so they can see women entice them all night until the morning. However, if people don’t pay for these events, the dancers and club crew don’t survive either. I’m curious to know how much the patrons paid to enter the club and how much money the average patron spent.

 The film also shows how straight people can take up space in lesbian spaces: “If you straight, you don’t need to be in the front,” said one of the hosts of the club. 

 It’s also somewhat ironic how this Black lesbian space is supposed to be a safe haven for lesbian women. Still, men somehow ruined everything for the club, whether these men were in the form of undercover cops at the club or the owners of the space they were renting.

 Who knew that ass-shaking and titty-bouncing could have so many layers to them?

caution: that black, revolutionary leader might be just like your raggedy uncle

Baadasssss! was insightful in showing the tumultuous behind-the-scenes work it took to create Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song. From having to collaborate with non-Black creators due to financial hardship, childhood trauma, and infidelity, Melvin Van Peebles proves that no Black revolutionary is perfect.

 The way Black women are portrayed as subservient with little apparent value in Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song is because these depictions of Black women reflect how Melvin Van Peebles treated the Black women in his life. Melvin Van Peebles was sleeping around with other women to satisfy his sexual dominance, perhaps. That’s simply what strong Black men who will lead the community into social utopia do! He can think so radically and complexly about how Black people can achieve freedom in every sense of the word but cannot seem to radically think about how his spouse would feel about his infidelity.

 The viewers also can see how Melvin Van Peeble’s rocky relationship with his father is reflected in Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song. Melvin Van Peebles, even against his wife’s wishes, forced his son to do a sex scene with an adult. There’s a scene in the movie where Melvin reflects on how his father forced him to do things he didn’t like. So, you can see this cycle of trauma is being passed down effortlessly, although Melvin Van Peebles considers himself a revolutionary. Also, children don’t have much agency in society, and Baadasssss! proves that harm to children can be done in more subtle ways and doesn’t always look like physical abuse. Again, Melvin Van Peebles talks about being a revolutionary and prioritizing freedom in the Black community but doesn’t dare to apply that to his son’s freedom of choice.

 I want all humans in America who are 17 years old and younger to revolt against the world so they can lead and eliminate these oppressive adults! They can start with me first because I’m tired of working and paying bills anyway. It won’t be too difficult, considering that you can buy a gun from a lemonade stand if you want to.

 I think the film was a therapeutic experience for Mario Van Peebles because he didn’t shy away from showing the uglier side of his father. He could’ve easily used the film only to praise Melvin Van Peebles, but he didn’t.

 I’m starting to think the Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song was about Melvin Van Peebles.

 Even with all my criticism, I’m impressed with how Melvin Van Peebles could still produce such a powerful and thoughtful film despite all the barriers in front of him. It took a community pulling together to create the film and the power of community is reflected in Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song.

 After watching Baadasssss!, I’m still left wondering about a question. Are you really a revolutionary if your revolutionary politics don’t also seek to provide emotional sanctuary for those closest to you?

 I don’t think Melvin Van Peebles’s personal life is grounds for discarding his revolutionary ideas. Still, it should serve as a lesson for everyone to be revolutionary-minded both in and outside the comfort of their homes.

 You can’t long for Black people’s social and physical freedom and simultaneously force your son to have sex with a grown woman in a movie. I know there’s a price to pay for freedom.

i like my liberation just like i like my sex...raw!

Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song has some of the rawest and unfiltered visuals and messaging I’ve ever seen in a film. I should’ve known it would be extra with all those s’s in the film's title. An analysis of sexuality, gender, and economic oppression and how they all relate to social liberation for Black people is prevalent.

 It’s one of the most raw and explicit films I have ever seen outside of pornography. Not that I have watched pornographic films; I’ve just heard so much about them. I’m sure the person reading this has watched porn, though, but not an angel shining so bright like me.

 Anyway, the main takeaway message(s) are not very clear, so I’m not sure how younger people and people who aren’t trained to analyze film will be able to process this film on a deeper level. Melvin Van Peebles wanted the film to be rated lower so that younger audiences could also watch the film. I wonder why he just didn’t adjust the film so that younger people can see it. How can the film be revolutionary if it isn’t accessible? There’s a way to illustrate sex and other taboo actions without actually showing it.

 Sweetback, the film’s main protagonist, continuously runs from the police. This could be a possible analysis of the fate of Black men or Black people and the way they’re over-policed. Something cool happened with the police, too. You see a bunch of young people in the film help Sweetback escape the police by sabotaging the police vehicle and making it explode. This is the type of community unity that could help revolutionize Black people around the world, especially in America.

 I admire Huey P. Newton, but I don’t agree with all his praise and analysis of the film. I think the intention of the film is worthy of praise but not the execution. Newton mentions how the Black women in the film are tired but happy because they are feeding the young Black boy. Newton labels the Black boy as the “liberator and the future of the women.” This just reinforces the idea that women are subservient to men, and they need a big strong man with an erect penis to save them. This also could be harmful to young Black boys and putting such a responsibility on them at such a young age.

 Then, regarding the sexual relationship between the boy and the women, Newton explains that these much older women are simply showing the boy what real love looks and feels like and helping the boy grow into a man. You get it, right? Because Black men are useless unless they’ve buried their ever-so-cherished penis deep inside a vagina that is so essential to the experience of a man. Our liberation is going to come from a Black man who is well acquainted with a vagina and knows how to lead a Black woman to freedom if she uses her wondrous Black girl magic to feed Black men and only speaks when spoken to!

 There is a general theme that I loved about Newton’s analysis, and he acknowledges that living situations that Black people (and other economically oppressed people) have been coerced into can be highly determinative of their inability to navigate society in a way that may or may not be more dignified. No one is born thinking about living a life of robbery or selling their body. It’s all a response to trying to escape poverty. You can’t create a capitalist world that rewards the wealthy and shames people for how they achieve that wealth. No one is wealthy in any pure way that doesn’t cause some kind of harm or is dependent on the destruction of another.

 I also have my own takeaways from the film. The Black body is desired by the colonizer only in two extremes: to enforce violence upon it or to extract pleasure from it. It’s useless outside of those scenarios. The personality, imagination, and political aspirations of Black people, as it relates to social well-being, are unimportant.

Befriending the Bully

It is a necessary film for marginalized communities, especially Black people because it shows the potential importance of armed resistance against colonialism. Armed resistance isn’t something to be feared, especially since the colonial powers won’t hesitate to use armed violence against their colonial subjects to maintain order.

 The Spook Who Sat by the Door is a film that was pleasing to watch and includes analyses on various topics: biracial Black people, Black men, Black politics, Black police, and Black women.

 I’m disappointed with Black women’s portrayal in the film regarding their position in this revolutionary form of government resistance. The film's creators had enough imagination and vision to portray a sort of organized resistance that modern Black Americans have never seen. Still, they also didn’t have enough imagination to represent Black women in a revolutionary way.

 Sex work isn’t inherently a bad thing, and I love that people like to have sex, but why is the Black woman being portrayed as such? And the main protagonist, Dan Freeman, had the nerve to call her Dahomey Queen. He didn’t treat her like a queen. Maybe he did. Maybe the movie is challenging our attitudes towards sex workers because Dahomey Queen did play a role towards the end, almost as an undercover agent. Either way, Dahomey Queen is still subservient to men. The nerve to call her Dahomey Queen and not dare to give her warrior characteristics because of the historical context of the Dahomey women warriors is ridiculous. Queens deserve sex, too, if that’s what they desire, but this could’ve been handled better in the film.

 Also, the leading Black man was paying for sex, even though he has a spouse waiting for him back home. Am I shocked? No. It just reinforces the stereotype that men or Black men must desire sex from a woman to be considered masculine or “real” men. A Black man not faithful to his woman? Again, I am not shocked. Please read the following quote in your best Incredible Hulk voice, “Black man love sex. Black man see woman. Black man must crush vagina. Vagina keep Black man alive. Penis must collide with vagina. Vagina make Black man feel good.”

 I know I sound dramatic, but that’s how I feel at the moment!

 There was also a Black woman working in the office of a U.S. senator at the beginning. Could she not have had a role in this revolutionary resistance? I guess the Black women will just be in the kitchen baking sweet potato pies and frying chicken while the men are doing manly things during the revolution.  

 The movie is inspirational, but should you expect your cousin who works at their cushy government job to replicate what happened in the film? Absolutely not. There are plenty of Black military people all over, and I doubt any of them have these grand plans of resistance.

 It makes me wonder if something like this would happen today, would it even be close to successful? Would it make the social conditions for Black people worse?

 It was the CIA’s underestimation of Black people that led to their impending doom. Ironically, the film makes me appreciate the fact that the colonial rule underestimates Black resistance and cunning because it’s going to lead to their downfall.

 If you’re going to be in spaces or aligning with oppressive or counter-revolutionary state entities like the police or government entities like the CIA or FBI, then at least use that experience to help improve the material and psychological differences of marginalized people.

 What the film really lacked was the final product or even the half-done product of what armed resistance could look like. The positive impact of such a movement wasn’t shown in the film. Instead, you see the violence that is required, and you see some of the backlash Black folks on the sidelines will face (process, not product). It would’ve been nice to see a realistic, nigh-utopian society that revolutionaries dream of.

get me back down to the country-these city folks wild

Harlem Nights is filled with jokes that appeal to the Black community, so don’t let the Rotten Tomatoes score scare you from viewing this comedic work of art. The film certainly doesn’t hold back on what is funny and what groups/identities will be the object of the jokes.

 You get a heavy dose of all the Black luxury aesthetic as you watch Harlem Nights: fancy outfits with elegant hats to match, luxury cars made for the most elite, and beautiful homes with all the décor that would make your poor ol’ granny jealous.

 I’m not gonna front. Fat people got torn up in this movie. Vera is often teased for her obesity. She’s also the head madam and noticeably sassy. She’s also shown as a nurturer by the way she is concerned that the men have something to eat while she is preparing food in the kitchen.

 Still, fat people also got their praise too. The film doesn’t directly uplift fat women or fat people in general, but the film could be interpreted as indirectly doing so. Vera bested Quick in a duel in the alley. So, I see that as a victory for fat people despite all the jokes the film makes about fat people. Vera was the only person from the film to dominate Quick physically. I wonder if this fight could be harmful to the subconscious of the viewer. Does it mean that Black women, specifically fat Black women, can withstand physical violence from men? I know there are plenty of women in the world who could dog walk some of our most precious homeboys, but I wonder if this image of Vera fighting on par with Quick makes people subconsciously believe fat Black women are like Granny Goodness and deserve to be handled the same way. Quick had to resort to shooting Vera in the foot, which is problematic. Too many Black men (and people in general) resort to using guns when their little cotton candy fists aren’t enough.

 Fat people weren’t the only target for mockery. The Black championship boxer, Jack Jenkins, had a severe stuttering problem that was teased throughout the film, but even he was not to be messed with because he could pummel you. I’m unsure what the lesson here is or even if there is a lesson to learn. Maybe it means that a speech impediment shouldn’t be something to be ashamed of, and it won’t necessarily hold you back from greatness.

 Just as much as the film laughs at people who don’t fit society’s privileged body types or speech patterns, it also uplifts them.

 The film isn’t heavy on plot twists and seems to focus on humor. Quick’s killing of the belligerent man who was threatening Sugar Ray was indicative of Quick’s future. He was already bold enough to kill that young, rightfully so, and he didn’t change much as an adult. Would he be a different man if he had different guidance? The film doesn’t fool us for a second to believe that Quick would turn out any other way—not saying it had to.

 I noticed how the film shows that, although White immigrant groups like Italians and Irish have faced a certain degree of marginalization, they’re still White people and hold a certain amount of privilege above Black people. These White immigrant mobsters remind me of the White Americans who used to also marginalize them with the way they meddled in Black affairs. It reminds me of all the examples in Black American history where White people have destroyed Black businesses out of sheer envy. This goes to show that even the most marginalized subgroups of White people still manage to claim enough privilege over Black people to the point of destruction.

 Even with the mobsters' efforts, Quick and the gang prevailed in the end. They had to scatter and leave the city, but they'll probably be just fine because America is friendly to the wealthy.

When the Fighting Stops

Watching Da 5 Bloods was like watching my uncles on the big screen. The main mission of the film was to retrieve some gold they found while fighting in the Vietnam War.

 There’s plenty of gun violence, Black fathers being absent from their children’s lives (either physically or emotionally), and Black men falling in love with women who have many ancestors who have surely called Black people the n-word.

 I like how Da 5 Bloods doesn’t seem to glorify Black men being in the military and is still critical of the idea of Black people fighting for a nation and causes that are not anywhere near the best interest of Black people in America or elsewhere.

 Black people are not exempt from criticism for their choice to join the United States military and aid US imperialism. While I don’t think people should join the military, especially marginalized people, I also acknowledge how the capitalist government coerces its citizens into doing all kinds of things for money. There really aren’t any perfect employers in the US who are just completely innocent of perpetuating some social issue. The universities these fancy professors work for, the Walmart that your cousin DonQuetta works for, and the military that your trifling ex-lover works for all-cause intentional harm in society, regardless of how grand or petite.

 The main cast of Black Vietnam veterans are clearly hungry for money and resources, which is probably why they enlisted in the military in the first place if they weren’t all drafted. It makes you wonder if military veterans are being supported financially and medically as they need. Just go outside. American society is not in a shortage of nigh poor veterans with mental health issues and suicidal thoughts.

The film does share an important message about PTSD and how it can destroy family dynamics. You see Paul, one of the Vietnam veterans, confronting some past war trauma that fuels his PTSD. He accepts his responsibility for the accidental killing of his dear friend and comrade, and it helps him overcome his mental health struggles. I wonder if this oversimplified way of healing sends the wrong message to the audience. I would imagine that it takes more than a dream or daydream to make significant and long-lasting strides in the journey of PTSD healing.

 The veterans and the White seductress lady get their money and redistribute their newfound wealth to various places, including family and advocacy groups.

 I felt like the film wants the audience to so badly think that because people were killed on both sides of the war, we should have some grace for the US military. Maybe I missed it, but I wish the film would’ve taken a deeper dive into the root causes of the war and the US’s intention to involve themselves in the war.

 All in all, it’s a fun adventure film that depicts older people, instead of “steaming hot” muscle heads, still moving whooping ass on the big screen. It was a nice mix of fiction and non-fiction. It’s clearly fiction, but the accurate historical information that is laced throughout the film keeps you balanced.

 And major shame on capitalism for forcing these old Black men to risk their lives over some damn gold!

a side hustle just to make ends meet

In America and some other devilish colonial countries, pursuing wealth has been etched into our brains so deeply. The difference in privilege between the wealthy and the poor can be seen more easily than the Sun trying to hide behind Pluto. The wealthy and the poor do have an interesting overlapping trait: They both spend their days plotting schemes to get rich (poor people) or get even richer (wealthy people).

 Chameleon Street is a movie about a Black man living in Detroit, William Douglas Street Jr., who spends his days being an imposter for multiple professions, mainly to support his wife financially.

 The largest theme of the movie is the importance of money in a capitalist society. Who has to turn to scamming and other criminal activities for money? Well, all poor people, but it seems as if Black people are always pushed even harder to turn to crime. Wealthy people also scam and commit crimes. Do not be fooled. You must have a certain kind of authority or social status to commit a certain crime. That person who makes the employee salary decision at that large, fancy research university is scamming you out of money on every paycheck, so why can’t poor people do the same? Doesn’t capitalism show us every day that money takes precedence above all?

 I appreciate how the main character didn’t pursue many stereotypical ways of Black men illegally working for money. Usually, you see Black men illegally making money in film through drug dealing or thievery; however, Street crept into spaces that are regarded as socially elite. He scammed his way into being a doctor, reporter, and an exchange student at an elite university.

 There are plenty of cleverly ridiculous stunts being pulled in the movie that make some of the heavier subject matter more accessible.

 There are multiple social issues discussed in the film, and I like how they don’t seem forced or offer any unrealistic solutions to them. The film displays serious issues without being overly entertaining to the point where the issue being discussed becomes a simple mockery. There was a prison scene where Douglas was mistakenly seen as homosexual because he had been accepting favors from his cellmate. His cellmate tries to ask him for a sexual favor, but Douglas hilariously and ridiculously fakes an epileptic seizure so he can be removed from the situation. Prison homosexuality and rape are real and serious topics that deserve to be explored for the sake of the inmates. What I like about the scene is that Douglas didn’t call the cellmate a homophobic slur, nor did he talk down on homosexuality. Rape is not okay for any gender or any context, so I am glad it wasn’t shown or implied. This scene could invite people to study why men and people in prison resort to rape. What have we done as a society to even allow or encourage these things to happen?

 I clearly see how the movie wasn’t a blockbuster hit back in its day. The film's humor, content, delivery, and creativity were too ahead of its time, especially for Black cinema. The creative direction wasn’t the only factor that most likely held this film back from achieving mainstream success. The film probably needed a more star-studded cast to capture the general population's attention because Hollywood seems to favor popularity. Mainstream success shouldn’t be the goal, but mainstream success certainly pays the bills.

 This film reminds me of Random Acts of Flyness by Terence Nance. The movie is sort of all over the place and not immediately clear about what is going on, which I think could be a strength because it forces you to watch more intently. Every movie can’t have the Disney Marvel formula laced with special effects and action scenes meant to carry the whole movie. You’ll have to pull out your adult brain and leave the “goo goo gah gah” baby brain, which needs flashing lights and middle school lunch table jokes to like a film, at home in the crib.

They'll Just Call You a Nigger Anyway. Who Gives a Damn?

American Fiction as a title for this movie is fitting because it highlights how society at large is only interested in, especially financially, a stereotypical view of Black/African-descended people in America. This narrow view of Black/African-descended people is indeed fictional.

 American Fiction’s main character is Monk, and he’s a professor and recently struggling author who reluctantly wrote a book that centers Black stereotypes on subjects such as crime and language as a joke to see how people would react. Still, his stereotypical book ended up being a bestseller. Must Black people and other minority groups in America lose their souls a little bit to reach achievement in a White supremacist world?

 Before I write about what I thought the film's main messages were, I’d like to briefly discuss how much I enjoyed a certain aspect of romance displayed in the film. Monk was interacting with Coraline, played by Erika Alexander, in her home as her ex-husband walked in. I love how normal it all seemed. Coraline calmly explained to Monk that she and her ex-husband were recently divorced, and Monk didn’t bat an eye. The ex-husband even asked if Monk was staying for dinner. I don’t have the data because who gives a damn right now, but I have noticed that most people in society are conditioned to hate their ex-lovers and banish them to the netherworld. You don’t have to hate your ex, and it’s okay to remain cordial or even maintain a platonic relationship.

 Maybe I’m not so brief now, but I also loved seeing the family’s maid, Lorraine, fall in love and marry her lover because they don’t fit the archetype of people who have “nice” bodies and look like celebrities and social media influencers who receive all the praise for their looks. It was nice to see some other types of people get all the love and glory.

 This film proves how silly the American Dream really is. In the movie, you have three individuals who have achieved the highest level of education possible, and they are still experiencing financial hardship and familial issues, even though the American Dream says that whoever works hard will be blessed abundantly. I wonder if the movie was attempting to make some critique about capitalism. The movie shows that America is financially difficult to live in regardless of the social or educational status achieved, so is going to college really necessary, or is it just a money grab for major corporations?

 Issa Rae’s character, Sintara, does pose a critical question about the usefulness of writing stereotypical Black stories. She wondered if Monk’s real problem was with the real stories of these real Black people or if his problem was ultimately with the White people who were fascinated with these real stories in a toxic way.

 I love it when the savory smell of some ultra-crispy fried chicken that was seasoned with ancestral love and determination dances past my negro nostrils, but why does the world like to read about these stories from Black people so much? Why are watermelon and gang fights in a neighborhood where White people don’t jog in so entertaining to people?

 The stereotypical stories deserve to be told, too, because if they don’t get told, then those types of Black people would then be erased from literature. Black people read and enjoy these books, too. You can’t scream, “Black people aren’t all the same!” and then be upset when Hot Cheeto-loving, weed-smoking Sha’Neequa Luvita Jenkins is the main character in a hood novel where she braids hair for a living and lets her no-good baby daddy use her Nissan Altima to drive to fake job interviews.

If You Don't Evolve, You Will Get Freezer Burn

Neptune Frost is an Africanfuturist film that features anti-colonial views about gender, religion, technology, and criminal justice.

 It's a bit problematic to have Ezra Miller as a producer. I wonder if that’s a turn-off to potential viewers. Ezra Miller’s list of alleged criminal activity, including the abusive encounters with women, is so long that it would make the Nile River look short. Could that hinder the beauty and success of this film? Anyway, they couldn’t find any Black producers?

 Is technology going to be our liberator? The film shows how technology can be useful to social movements. So many times, we see how modern technological advances have been proven to be anti-Black or work against people of marginalized groups. I immediately think about face recognition software with its overrepresentation of mugshot data from Black people.

 It’s such a beautiful film filled with vibrant colors that reflect Burundi's cultural and aesthetical vibrancy and all of East Africa.

 When I think of criminal justice in the Western world, specifically the United States, I think of how it heavily relies on imprisonment for those who cause harm.

 This film has allowed an intersex protagonist to shine without creating drama about the identity. There is no judgment for the main character, Neptune, wearing heels even though they are perceived as masculine. Gender is irrelevant in this Africanfuturistic society, and the obsession with gender identity clearly has no place here because they get along fine without it. Let’s face it: there’s no intellectual reason why another person’s gender expression (a concept that is completely made up) should boil your nerves the way they do. Grow up and read some books or articles with proof of intellectual rigor written by vetted authors with a certified scholarly background.

 I’m tired of reading your views on gender that are only informed by videos on social media and a manly figure from your childhood who used to punch you in the chest when you were caught listening to Destiny’s Child.

 I noticed that hip-hop was one of the main types of music used in the film. Early hip-hop artists used music to draw attention to the social ills happening in inner city neighborhoods, especially neighborhoods in New York City. I’m not sure why hip-hop is used versus some East African style of music. Perhaps the film is making a claim that hip-hop is a universal language of all Black people due to its foundational element of social protest.

 My one complaint is that the message of the film doesn’t feel accessible to the sort of audience who could benefit from seeing it. In an interview, the producers, Anisia Uzeyman and Saul Williams, expressed that they want this film to inspire social change in the world. As powerful and thoughtful as the film is, I’m afraid that the creativity will shroud the message of social change that the film intends to convey. The intersex identity and overall revolutionary views on gender and society should’ve been more evident. Also, being more forthright about why the audience should care about these topics would make the film more accessible to those who need to see it the most. This movie is great for film buffs and academics who are used to critically analyzing film.

 I can’t imagine how a teenager who already has homophobic, misogynistic, and/ or sexist views could view this film and begin to experience a new sense of social awareness that they can use to become better humans.

Sorry to Expose You

If you don’t give a damn about wage justice or anti-capitalism, then this article isn’t for you because you’re obviously rich and indoctrinated into the ideologies of capitalism, so I already know you think the fry cook at White Castle doesn’t deserve to afford housing outside of the “hood”

 Reading some stuffy book written by some academic that you’ve never heard of about labor unions and the devastation that capitalism causes on anyone who isn’t wealthy sounds like so much fun, right? The movie, Sorry to Bother You, exposes the greed of corporations and the humans who are foolish enough to believe that these corporations are going to be their saving grace.

 Boots Riley took some key ideas about anti-capitalism and put them into an entertaining visual form so that those who are less enthused about reading may also observe some necessary critical commentary that keeps the majority of us working full-time jobs while renting apartment units that can’t seem to evict the roaches and rodents but want double your paycheck to live there.

 The more money you make, the more likely your money comes from a source of social evil.

 When I think of cities such as Oakland, I think of places with evidence of some social progression, which I saw in this film. I noticed how the main character, Cassius, was casually seen taking a piggyback ride on his girlfriend’s back. This dynamic is uncommon because it’s normally a man giving a woman a piggyback ride, but that whole gender role norm is thrown to the wayside in this film. If we can let go of these strict gender norms that damper people’s quality of life, then maybe we have the power to give up capitalism, which is also a social norm that dampers people’s quality of life.

 The horse species represents how ridiculous capitalism truly is and how it dehumanizes people. You clearly see how Cassius was coerced into using his “White” voice to be a more successful telemarketer. This suggests that his Blackness needed to be blotted out to move up the corporate ladder. Even Detroit, the girlfriend of Cassius, used a British voice to help sell her art, so she, too, is proving that assimilation into whiteness is lucrative.

 I couldn’t help but notice the depiction of drug use and its association with wealth. It seems as if these wealthy, mostly White, people can normalize illegal drug use that poor people cannot get away with. Society tells us that if we work hard and stay out of trouble, we will be surely rewarded. We don’t see that happening here. We see a bunch of corporate people who are okay with facilitating the sale of weapons that perpetuate United States imperialism while having fun doing illegal drugs who are being rewarded. If these were a group of Black people in an impoverished neighborhood smoking weed and glorifying street violence, then they would be painted as something that doesn’t deserve to be rewarded.

 The film shows us that marginalized people, especially Black people, are not immune to causing societal harm. He knew that moving up the corporate ladder would necessitate the abandonment of his comrades who were protesting. Is he doing good or bad? I’m not sure.

Are you surprised that an impoverished person is abandoning his morals to become wealthy? No, you shouldn’t. That’s what capitalism does, though. It prioritizes wealth and money, and people do whatever they have to do to attain it, so we shouldn’t be too quick to judge people for surviving the system the best way they see fit.

Is it a Black Film, or is it just a Film With Black People in it?

What is a Black film according to my non-expertise in filmmaking? It’s not something that can be studied using the scientific method like objective, scientific facts that can be proven, such as the importance of oxygen for human breathing or the scientific fact that soul food is the best cuisine known on Earth. Therefore, what defines a Black film is wide open to interpretation. To be clear, this interpretation should only be done by people of African descent. We already let outsiders weasel their way into things like rap, cornrows, and fried chicken; just let us have this one damn thing. A Black film has to intentionally portray an experience unique to people, not necessarily all, of the darker ethnic groups of Africa, including the Diaspora.

 The problem with that is how varied the Black experience is. Unfortunately, this film may not satisfy all, some, or even a majority of the Black audience members, and that’s okay, too. Not only is Black film hard to define, but in many ways, Blackness is difficult to define because Blackness is so diverse. The term “Black” was only created so White Europeans could messily group all darker-skinned Africans together and do what they’ve done well for hundreds of years: colonize, destroy, and ask for managers when being slightly inconvenienced in public spaces.

 The Black experience of a wealthy, heterosexual, Christian, MBA from an elite university businessman who comes from generational wealth from a family in Los Angeles is going to be different from the Black experience of a poor, agnostic, high school educated, fast food working trans woman who parents kicked her out the house in East Atlanta when she was 14 years old. There are people within the Black community who would be disappointed to see a film about either one of these people’s lives because they feel like it’s not a Black film because it’s not an accurate portrayal of Black life. But you’re reading this article because you’re smart and realize that the Black experience is a kaleidoscope. I agree that these films wouldn’t be Black films if you take them for face value, but they would be Black films if the creators successfully portrayed how a country largely built on Black oppression is relevant to their respective stories.

 So, let’s focus on what is objectively true about Blackness in society. I argue that at least one experience connects all Black people. All Black people have been impacted socially and materially by the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade and/or White supremacy. I think any film that makes some sort of commentary on any aspect of Black social welfare that can be linked to being subjected to survival under White supremacy is a Black film. Black film is much more about Black creatives and Black casts.

 By my explanation, this means that non-Black people could make a Black film too. Does that mean the Black film will be necessarily more or less accurate than what Black filmmakers and creatives do? No. Does that make them a Black filmmaker? No, they would just be people who made a Black film. Do I want non-Black people making Black films? No. Is my little raggedy article going to stop them from trying? Absolutely not. I just told you that they wear cornrows!

 I could create a film with an all-Black creative team and cast about the adventures of a subcategory of Black people who don’t know anything about Earth who live on Saturn and worship vanilla cupcakes that are dripping with frosting. Does that mean it’s a Black film? Hell no.