The review does not mention Deandra (played by Regina Hall) at all, among other black characters who weren't negative representations per se. Deandra is very prominent in the second act of the movie and her responsibility and dedication to the mission is quite apparent.
It's implied that me and all the people who identify with that review watched the movie, watched her portrayal, and didn't find it to override the issues present.
But if you want to throw the old "there's some good ones", go ahead.
Well there are no "good" characters in this film so how would one add a positive portrayal of blacks? Maybe "Pat" could have also been black but he's an ex-bomber turned paranoid junkie.
I think the character traits were what they were because the story doesn't work otherwise. I don't think it was PTA's express intention to showcase negative black stereotypes.
You're more intent defending PTA than trying to speak to the actual review's sentiment, so I assume there's some personal hangup there.
You're not a bad person for liking flawed media, but making flawed arguments to try and blank Black people and their reception crosses into it for sure.
Regardless, I think it’s a fair observation that French 75 is cartoonish at times. This is not a movie about how great revolutionaries are, although it is a movie about how necessary they are. PTA also certainly makes some odd choices around minority characters.
Watching this movie, I did not get a sense of glorifying violence in any way. If anything, it glorifies resistance to authority. The strongest and most successful members of the resistance (like the Sensei) avoid confrontation. It's the violent ones that end up detracting from their cause.
Funnily enough that character's name is Perfidia, which is the Latin word for treacherous. To anyone considering watching, it is a well-paced action movie with some very funny parts.
I tend to agree with this, although I’ll note that I don’t equate revolution with violence. Often but not always, and Sensei sure has weapons at hand, for whatever that’s worth.
Who said the film is glorifying violence, certainly not that review?
Certainly not the review lambasting PTA for presenting Black women in every negative stereotype possible to show that violence is bad?
Certainly not the movie that has a Black woman named Jungle Pussy (I don't care it's her stagename, she's not robbing banks on stage) shouting about how she defines Black Power while screeching and waving a gun on a bank counter, until her Black female accomplice shoots the Black guard.
Certainly not the movie where said accomplice then abandons her child (again) and places her in mortal danger while getting most of her accomplices killed.
A betrayal only made possible she cheated on her partner and was fucked and impregnated by an influential enough white man a few scenes earlier.
PTA is sick. There's a reason a Black woman has had 4 of his kids and he still won't marry her.
I've not seen the film yet (if ever) so I have no opinions here at all.
In general, reading books and watching film, I have no issue with singular characters; black women rap, some have songs such as WAP, other support Trump in earnest, some are matriarchs that usher in social change for the better, others can end up as welfare queens with crack babies, real life has a rich spectrum.
The review above has some strong opinions about PTA's character mix and representations and I'd really have to watch the film through to form an opinion as to whether this is odd for no reason, sloppy, an unconscious tell of the directors world view or a deliberate bit of skewing that forms part of whatever message he wishes to convey.
Like many, I try not to get too deep into a rabbit hole of second guessing books and films, first impressions are often the ones that count most.
