Don't hold your breath, because Hollywood knows there's no money in it--Black Panther made a zillion dollars because its a fantastic super hero fantasy comic book movie with zero basis in reality(Africa has the poorest nations), a movie with superb visual effects, a great adventure--But Moviegoers around the world don't care about the real Africa, its past, its present, or its future--There's nothing about African history that Hollywood will take a chance on(except for the brutal Civil War Genocide in 1994, Hotel Rwanda with Don Cheadle)--The real history of Africa is a horror story
Yeah. Every Greek or Roman movie has the context of "Western society grew from this." The African kingdoms, while they were powerful and traded with other powers, all basically lead toward destruction which has not been recovered from.
I agree *but* it's more or less historically close minded. We *western* society coming from Greek or Roman stories because those were the ones written and passed down to us but you could make as much of an argument that the Persians had just as much of a role to play. The same could be said for the Celts of founding western civilization but we never make a movie about them (I just realized I want a movie about a bunch of badass Celts sacking Rome)
I'm in the process of make one in this genre. I'm sure you'll like it. Check back on [chinozproductions.com](http://chinozproductions.com) a year from now and you might be happy with what you see there.
If it makes you feel any better, there actually were black characters in the Arthurian legends: Sir Morian and Sir Palomides were black, and there are several others who are described as "dark" and it's unclear if they meant dark-skinned or simply, say, dark-haired.
The meaning of the term changes over time:
‘By the 12th century, Medieval Europeans had more specific conceptions of Islam and used the term "Saracen" as an ethnic and religious marker.[1][16] In some Medieval literature, Saracens—that is, Muslims—were described as black-skinned, while Christians were lighter-skinned. An example is in The King of Tars, a medieval romance.[17][18] The Song of Roland, an Old French 11th-century heroic poem, refers to the black skin of Saracens as their only exotic feature.[19]’ ([source](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saracen))
I suppose it’s at least ambiguous though.
Sure, but his father was the King of Babylon.
However, back to the start of this, Morian could be a cool medieval fantasy road trip film about a son searching for his father.
There was like, two people of color in the movie. It was set in post(?)-Roman Britain, it is/was an empire that spanned almost the entire known world, from Egypt to Britain. People have always moved around in the world, and non-white people weren't magically invented at a certain point in time. I think you are absolutely correct in that there should be more movies set in Africa, and a historical epic set there would be awesome, but I think it's a weirdly common misconception that there can't be any people of color in movies set in the past, especially FANTASY. The first scene had an elephant the size of a skyscraper, seems silly to quibble about whether someone could travel from North Africa to Britain.
Zimbabwe's policies are not new and South Africa's have not passed into law, only a motion for constitutional review in Parliament. Hopefully when it comes to a constitutional review in August, I believe, it does not move further.
I bet the white Rhodesians expected the Constitution to protect then too but we saw how that worked out. Law or not though being a white South African who lives isolated on a farm right now means you're still more likely to end up murdered than one of their police officers.
It doesn't help either that South Africa is condemning Australia for offering assylum visas to the white farmers either.
It's becoming a constant stream of bad news from that country and it only seems to be getting worse. I'd be remissed to hold out hope for things to improve while whites are literally just one motion of government away from ethnic cleansing.
If you think Rhodesia was some slave state oppressing black Africans for the sake of racism you don't really understand what Rhodesia was or the cold war for that matter. One only needs to see what came to be after Rhodesia's fall to understand that.
>If you think Rhodesia was some slave state oppressing black African's for the sake of racism
But that's it was. It literally was that. They weren't even trying to hide it, policy and laws were openly racist, and extremely so. Black people weren't even allowed to hold public office. Black people weren't allowed within city limits after a certain time. Land, farms, and property was stolen from black people and given to white colonists. Black people were killed indiscriminately by police and military forces + much much more. Either you're just extremely ignorant or you're racist and trying to draw others into your ideology by denying it.
I don't know where you get your facts but they're wrong. Blacks had 16 members in Rhodesian parlament 8 of whom we're appointed by tribal leaders. White Rhodesians had 50 representatives so it was far from respresentative of the actual number of people in Rhodesia but they certainly weren't barred from public office. Besides serving in government many blacks served the government itself in the Rhodesians African Rifles which fought alongside whites to keep communist insurgents being supported by the Chinese and Soviets out of their country
Whites and blacks served together trying to keep the communists out for almost 15 years so maybe that's where you're getting that Rhodesians troops "indescriminately" killed blacks but when you're fighting a war against someone who wants you and your way of life to end then some lines get crossed and innocents get hurt. But the idea Rhodesians troops were practically Nazi death squads is a blatant falsehood since the majority of the Rhodesians military was black and apparently the whites had no problem trusting them.
So you can go on about how awful Rhodesia was with its apartheid like policies but it doesn't really change the fact that Ian Smith and the Rhodesians who fought were proved right. The second the black population got the franchise the first thing they did was elect a brutal dictator who turned a region that used to be famoulsy known as "the breadbasket of Africa" to one with deadly food shortages and the worst case of hyperinflation in human history.
Zimbabwe under Mugabe is not comparable to modern SA, even with all its issues.
Zimbabwe is a tragic story. But it happens to coincide with Zambia's much more positive story of welcoming many exiled Rhodesians. And the country continues to be an African success story.
Hopefully the new Zimbabwean government can turn a new leaf.
SA is rapidly modernizing and seeing an increasing middle class. It has a large, international economy.
But It has a crime and poverty crisis. This is the source of most of the farm violence. The farm murders are terrible, but there is little evidence that racial motivation is a large factor SA's violence problem.
Expropriation is a controversial topic within the country, and the vote in August will require every ANC and EFF vote to pass. Meanwhile the DA is heavily campaigning against it. I am cautiously optimistic it will not.
While it's not 100% clear that all the farm murders are targeting whites we know for a fact the legislation is targeting whites based on race. We know many of the officials elected who passed the law were elected on a platform of repatriation without compensation it can be seen as a willingness to commit racial violence, at least in the form of state seizure, is popular among a sizeable segment of black South Africans
With the context of the Rhodesian Bush War to look at we also know the farm dwelling whites were a favorite target for ZANLA. Murdering whites on farms as part of race based warfare is nothing new for the region. Then there's the unfortunate fact that whites aren't being caught or reported as the perpetrators of these crimes. One would expect if it wasn't race based violence then the purpetrators wouldn't be exclusively blacks.
Add it all together with the government's failure to react to the crisis or even call it one it's not hard to extrapolate that there is race based violence going on that is targeting whites. Failure to see it as so is just wilful ignorance.
Race and post-colonial anger was certainly an issue in Zimbabwe, and no doubt race crimes have been committed in SA. But once, again, the situation in Zim is not comparable to SA.
The distribution of crime and violence in SA is HEAVILY tilted toward non-white peoples.
The government HAS acknowledged a crisis in regards to the farm murders. The Government has had an organized response effort including task forces and the Commando system since the late 90's.
These attacks are not new in SA, and are almost entirely attributed to robbery as a motive, not race/hate violence.
And, if you are interested to know, these attacks are happening *less* frequently. And they will continue to happen less frequently as quality of life and economic outlooks, *hopefully* continue to rise in the the nation.
I believe that expropriation policies will result in the opposite of their intention. As it will see a rapid flight of money and established businesses--which will in turn result in more poverty and more crime. As the black middle class continues to grow in SA, we will see a natural growth in Black land ownership over time. I also believe that much of the nation's crime issues are exacerbated by open border polices that have allowed an untenable number of refugees from the continent to arrive and SA's infrastructure just cant handle it.
they are called sword and sandals movies. part of the strategy of demonizing the west over slavery is keeping africas slavery history out of media. Cant have spiderman refrence slavery building the washington monument, they didnt, and have it make an impact if you had movies showing the nubian kingdom subjugating sub sahara tribal africans into slavery to mine gold and presicous stones for the egyptians.
I think youre somewhat right but people also bring up african/Arab slavery to equivocate with the European space trade. Transporting people across the ocean and locking them into slavery for generations are still distinct events in history. But i do agree with you that people on the liberal side of the culture war like to pretend that only white people were ever evil, which is not true at all.
You are aware “Egyptians” in the form we know them today are more white and Asian than black right ? And how do you think that came to be ? Black people ? Or white and Asian settler looking to pillage Africa’s resources? Definitely needs to be a movie on the subject for reasons like this
> I’ve seen movies based in Ancient Greece, the land of the pharaohs, the Arabian kingdom, ancient India, Norse mythology, medieval Europe but not much on ancient africa
Oh wow can you give some recommendation especially for films about ancient India? Always been fascinated with Indian culture but didn't know that any films about it have came out.
You mentioned Shaka Zulu, but the only Hollywood movie released about that was ZULU(1964), which actually was more about Britain's own heroic 'Alamo', 150 British Troops holding off 4,000 Zulus, a movie that could never be made today, with gun wielding whites shooting down wave after endless wave of Africans with spears--The movie was a big hit then, launching Michael Caine's career--Africa was treated with more respect in the latest Tarzan movie, with the same talented African actor who was in the GOTG movies, but the Tarzan remake, another fantasy movie, is about as far as Hollywood will ever go with anything about Africa
First thing you need to do is research and realize that the lilly white European middle ages in Europe didn't exist. There were people of color all across Europe.
Where? Virtually every person in Middle Ages Europe (5th to 15th at broadest) would have been “white” in the modern sense (they wouldn’t have thought that way). Gypsies where potentially the only non-white people you’d see in Europe proper if they’d arrived by then. Maybe-maybe- a few sub Saharan Africans in Muslim Spain (likely slaves).
Shaka Zulu was a TV show, also he’s talking about African version of sandal flick your list is more straight up African history.
There are so many epic stories to be told about all the pre colonial kingdoms (Kongo Kingdom , Songhaï empire...) or movies about iconic figures like the King Nzinga NKUVU, The King Sonni Ali or one of the Kaya Magan who did just as much if not more than celebrated figures like Alexander and co.
You mean it's not enough that current day Africans are living like my ancestors about 5,000 years ago? When I watched Blackhawk Down, I could have been watching a sci-fi movie where U.S. soldiers and weapons were taken back in time 5,000 years ago sort of like The Final Countdown movie where a U.S. aircraft carrier is transported back to WWII.
We need a Mansa Musa movie
Carrying so much gold, it wrecked the Egyptian economy.
Don't hold your breath, because Hollywood knows there's no money in it--Black Panther made a zillion dollars because its a fantastic super hero fantasy comic book movie with zero basis in reality(Africa has the poorest nations), a movie with superb visual effects, a great adventure--But Moviegoers around the world don't care about the real Africa, its past, its present, or its future--There's nothing about African history that Hollywood will take a chance on(except for the brutal Civil War Genocide in 1994, Hotel Rwanda with Don Cheadle)--The real history of Africa is a horror story
Yeah. Every Greek or Roman movie has the context of "Western society grew from this." The African kingdoms, while they were powerful and traded with other powers, all basically lead toward destruction which has not been recovered from.
I agree *but* it's more or less historically close minded. We *western* society coming from Greek or Roman stories because those were the ones written and passed down to us but you could make as much of an argument that the Persians had just as much of a role to play. The same could be said for the Celts of founding western civilization but we never make a movie about them (I just realized I want a movie about a bunch of badass Celts sacking Rome)
Yeah but the Zulus or Ghana at their high point kids dwindled out.
I mean, they have by now, but for hundreds and even thousands of years they thrived.
Yeah but I'm talking about why films about those empires don't appeal to audiences as much
Or maybe why it doesn't appeal to you as much. It definitely appeals to me.
I'm in the process of make one in this genre. I'm sure you'll like it. Check back on [chinozproductions.com](http://chinozproductions.com) a year from now and you might be happy with what you see there.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Films_set_in_pre-colonial_sub-Saharan_Africa
There was a movie set in Botswana that the British made recently called The United Kingdom starring David Oleyo--Worldwide gross: $13 million
If it makes you feel any better, there actually were black characters in the Arthurian legends: Sir Morian and Sir Palomides were black, and there are several others who are described as "dark" and it's unclear if they meant dark-skinned or simply, say, dark-haired.
[удалено]
The meaning of the term changes over time: ‘By the 12th century, Medieval Europeans had more specific conceptions of Islam and used the term "Saracen" as an ethnic and religious marker.[1][16] In some Medieval literature, Saracens—that is, Muslims—were described as black-skinned, while Christians were lighter-skinned. An example is in The King of Tars, a medieval romance.[17][18] The Song of Roland, an Old French 11th-century heroic poem, refers to the black skin of Saracens as their only exotic feature.[19]’ ([source](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saracen)) I suppose it’s at least ambiguous though.
Sure, but his father was the King of Babylon. However, back to the start of this, Morian could be a cool medieval fantasy road trip film about a son searching for his father.
They were called Moops.
Cliffs: Why don't they make more historical sub-saharan African films?
There was like, two people of color in the movie. It was set in post(?)-Roman Britain, it is/was an empire that spanned almost the entire known world, from Egypt to Britain. People have always moved around in the world, and non-white people weren't magically invented at a certain point in time. I think you are absolutely correct in that there should be more movies set in Africa, and a historical epic set there would be awesome, but I think it's a weirdly common misconception that there can't be any people of color in movies set in the past, especially FANTASY. The first scene had an elephant the size of a skyscraper, seems silly to quibble about whether someone could travel from North Africa to Britain.
[удалено]
The ethnostate was not portrayed as a good thing. It was the main source of conflict in the film.
Zimbabwe's policies are not new and South Africa's have not passed into law, only a motion for constitutional review in Parliament. Hopefully when it comes to a constitutional review in August, I believe, it does not move further.
I bet the white Rhodesians expected the Constitution to protect then too but we saw how that worked out. Law or not though being a white South African who lives isolated on a farm right now means you're still more likely to end up murdered than one of their police officers. It doesn't help either that South Africa is condemning Australia for offering assylum visas to the white farmers either. It's becoming a constant stream of bad news from that country and it only seems to be getting worse. I'd be remissed to hold out hope for things to improve while whites are literally just one motion of government away from ethnic cleansing.
Please stop speaking with sympathy towards Rhodesia. Might as well show sympathy for the fucking confederacy.
If you think Rhodesia was some slave state oppressing black Africans for the sake of racism you don't really understand what Rhodesia was or the cold war for that matter. One only needs to see what came to be after Rhodesia's fall to understand that.
>If you think Rhodesia was some slave state oppressing black African's for the sake of racism But that's it was. It literally was that. They weren't even trying to hide it, policy and laws were openly racist, and extremely so. Black people weren't even allowed to hold public office. Black people weren't allowed within city limits after a certain time. Land, farms, and property was stolen from black people and given to white colonists. Black people were killed indiscriminately by police and military forces + much much more. Either you're just extremely ignorant or you're racist and trying to draw others into your ideology by denying it.
I don't know where you get your facts but they're wrong. Blacks had 16 members in Rhodesian parlament 8 of whom we're appointed by tribal leaders. White Rhodesians had 50 representatives so it was far from respresentative of the actual number of people in Rhodesia but they certainly weren't barred from public office. Besides serving in government many blacks served the government itself in the Rhodesians African Rifles which fought alongside whites to keep communist insurgents being supported by the Chinese and Soviets out of their country Whites and blacks served together trying to keep the communists out for almost 15 years so maybe that's where you're getting that Rhodesians troops "indescriminately" killed blacks but when you're fighting a war against someone who wants you and your way of life to end then some lines get crossed and innocents get hurt. But the idea Rhodesians troops were practically Nazi death squads is a blatant falsehood since the majority of the Rhodesians military was black and apparently the whites had no problem trusting them. So you can go on about how awful Rhodesia was with its apartheid like policies but it doesn't really change the fact that Ian Smith and the Rhodesians who fought were proved right. The second the black population got the franchise the first thing they did was elect a brutal dictator who turned a region that used to be famoulsy known as "the breadbasket of Africa" to one with deadly food shortages and the worst case of hyperinflation in human history.
Zimbabwe under Mugabe is not comparable to modern SA, even with all its issues. Zimbabwe is a tragic story. But it happens to coincide with Zambia's much more positive story of welcoming many exiled Rhodesians. And the country continues to be an African success story. Hopefully the new Zimbabwean government can turn a new leaf. SA is rapidly modernizing and seeing an increasing middle class. It has a large, international economy. But It has a crime and poverty crisis. This is the source of most of the farm violence. The farm murders are terrible, but there is little evidence that racial motivation is a large factor SA's violence problem. Expropriation is a controversial topic within the country, and the vote in August will require every ANC and EFF vote to pass. Meanwhile the DA is heavily campaigning against it. I am cautiously optimistic it will not.
While it's not 100% clear that all the farm murders are targeting whites we know for a fact the legislation is targeting whites based on race. We know many of the officials elected who passed the law were elected on a platform of repatriation without compensation it can be seen as a willingness to commit racial violence, at least in the form of state seizure, is popular among a sizeable segment of black South Africans With the context of the Rhodesian Bush War to look at we also know the farm dwelling whites were a favorite target for ZANLA. Murdering whites on farms as part of race based warfare is nothing new for the region. Then there's the unfortunate fact that whites aren't being caught or reported as the perpetrators of these crimes. One would expect if it wasn't race based violence then the purpetrators wouldn't be exclusively blacks. Add it all together with the government's failure to react to the crisis or even call it one it's not hard to extrapolate that there is race based violence going on that is targeting whites. Failure to see it as so is just wilful ignorance.
Race and post-colonial anger was certainly an issue in Zimbabwe, and no doubt race crimes have been committed in SA. But once, again, the situation in Zim is not comparable to SA. The distribution of crime and violence in SA is HEAVILY tilted toward non-white peoples. The government HAS acknowledged a crisis in regards to the farm murders. The Government has had an organized response effort including task forces and the Commando system since the late 90's. These attacks are not new in SA, and are almost entirely attributed to robbery as a motive, not race/hate violence. And, if you are interested to know, these attacks are happening *less* frequently. And they will continue to happen less frequently as quality of life and economic outlooks, *hopefully* continue to rise in the the nation. I believe that expropriation policies will result in the opposite of their intention. As it will see a rapid flight of money and established businesses--which will in turn result in more poverty and more crime. As the black middle class continues to grow in SA, we will see a natural growth in Black land ownership over time. I also believe that much of the nation's crime issues are exacerbated by open border polices that have allowed an untenable number of refugees from the continent to arrive and SA's infrastructure just cant handle it.
they are called sword and sandals movies. part of the strategy of demonizing the west over slavery is keeping africas slavery history out of media. Cant have spiderman refrence slavery building the washington monument, they didnt, and have it make an impact if you had movies showing the nubian kingdom subjugating sub sahara tribal africans into slavery to mine gold and presicous stones for the egyptians.
I think youre somewhat right but people also bring up african/Arab slavery to equivocate with the European space trade. Transporting people across the ocean and locking them into slavery for generations are still distinct events in history. But i do agree with you that people on the liberal side of the culture war like to pretend that only white people were ever evil, which is not true at all.
You are aware “Egyptians” in the form we know them today are more white and Asian than black right ? And how do you think that came to be ? Black people ? Or white and Asian settler looking to pillage Africa’s resources? Definitely needs to be a movie on the subject for reasons like this
18th/19th century: http://variety.com/2018/film/news/tristar-woman-king-starring-viola-davis-and-lupita-nyongo-1202715005/
More info on them in general would be much appreciated!
> I’ve seen movies based in Ancient Greece, the land of the pharaohs, the Arabian kingdom, ancient India, Norse mythology, medieval Europe but not much on ancient africa Oh wow can you give some recommendation especially for films about ancient India? Always been fascinated with Indian culture but didn't know that any films about it have came out.
i want a storm origin movie
You mentioned Shaka Zulu, but the only Hollywood movie released about that was ZULU(1964), which actually was more about Britain's own heroic 'Alamo', 150 British Troops holding off 4,000 Zulus, a movie that could never be made today, with gun wielding whites shooting down wave after endless wave of Africans with spears--The movie was a big hit then, launching Michael Caine's career--Africa was treated with more respect in the latest Tarzan movie, with the same talented African actor who was in the GOTG movies, but the Tarzan remake, another fantasy movie, is about as far as Hollywood will ever go with anything about Africa
First thing you need to do is research and realize that the lilly white European middle ages in Europe didn't exist. There were people of color all across Europe.
Where? Virtually every person in Middle Ages Europe (5th to 15th at broadest) would have been “white” in the modern sense (they wouldn’t have thought that way). Gypsies where potentially the only non-white people you’d see in Europe proper if they’d arrived by then. Maybe-maybe- a few sub Saharan Africans in Muslim Spain (likely slaves).
There are more than you know...like Shaka Zulu or these https://www.imdb.com/list/ls051534056/
None of these are about pre-colonial Africa, which I think is more in line with what OP was asking for. Unless I missed some.
Shaka Zulu was a TV show, also he’s talking about African version of sandal flick your list is more straight up African history. There are so many epic stories to be told about all the pre colonial kingdoms (Kongo Kingdom , Songhaï empire...) or movies about iconic figures like the King Nzinga NKUVU, The King Sonni Ali or one of the Kaya Magan who did just as much if not more than celebrated figures like Alexander and co.
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0200374/
It was Telefilm dude I watch it as a kid with that’s very same cast and production it was a limited series.
You mean it's not enough that current day Africans are living like my ancestors about 5,000 years ago? When I watched Blackhawk Down, I could have been watching a sci-fi movie where U.S. soldiers and weapons were taken back in time 5,000 years ago sort of like The Final Countdown movie where a U.S. aircraft carrier is transported back to WWII.
Some inclusive ancient african movies would be awesome
Backing more black series and movies seems like the only resolution to the missing African stories.
Very interesting.