TCTTS said:

---

MJ20/20 said:

---

Don't be a gullible ****. It's a bad look.

---

So is ignoring reality, assuming the absolute worst in people, and then performatively yelling about it on the internet.

---

So soft. Even for a lady in the "industry "

While I think its understandable that people are looking at the movie through a racial lens, given the recent history of Hollywood entertainment to focus on that topic, this movie, IMO, isn't really about race at all. Or at least, racism is part of the context but not the message. The movie takes place in Jim Crowe south, so of course race is apart of that context. But the movie is really about the music and the struggle to feel alive in a place that is wanting you to be invisible or worse, and the lengths different characters go to in order to achieve that.

It really doesn't have anything to say about modern race relations, IMO, which is exactly why it ISN'T the BP frontrunner, even though its got a record # or nominations, was extremely successful at the box office, has incredibly positive reviews, and has so much industry cache above and below the line. The movie that is the front runners is OBAA, because it speaks to themes of race in a much more contemporary way, IMO.

I think getting hung up on race in Sinners is just overlaying too much of our current events on a movie that isn't really asking you to do that.

veryfuller said:

---

While I think its understandable that people are looking at the movie through a racial lens, given the recent history of Hollywood entertainment to focus on that topic, this movie, IMO, isn't really about race at all. Or at least, racism is part of the context but not the message. The movie takes place in Jim Crowe south, so of course race is apart of that context. But the movie is really about the music and the struggle to feel alive in a place that is wanting you to be invisible or worse, and the lengths different characters go to in order to achieve that.

It really doesn't have anything to say about modern race relations, IMO, which is exactly why it ISN'T the BP frontrunner, even though its got a record # or nominations, was extremely successful at the box office, has incredibly positive reviews, and has so much industry cache above and below the line. The movie that is the front runners is OBAA, because it speaks to themes of race in a much more contemporary way, IMO.

I think getting hung up on race in Sinners is just overlaying too much of our current events on a movie that isn't really asking you to do that.

---

I thought it was just about some people trying to not get killed by vampires.

Quote:

---

It really doesn't have anything to say about modern race relations, IMO, which is exactly why it ISN'T the BP frontrunner, even though its got a record # or nominations, was extremely successful at the box office, has incredibly positive reviews, and has so much industry cache above and below the line. The movie that is the front runners is OBAA, because it speaks to themes of race in a much more contemporary way, IMO.

---

There is some stuff in there about how desperate the white vampires were to absorb black music and culture (white vampires wanting into the Juke Joint to steal the music for their own) and then once the black people are turned they live up to black stereotypes, to an extreme, to be a part of white vampire culture or it's about black culture giving up their culture, humanity, and originality to be a part of white culture. (the modern ending of MBJ's dress and behavior.)
Not modern, but the vampires mainly depicted in the movie were Irish. A group also typically treated very badly in American history who gave up their culture, originality, etc. to fit into white non-Irish culture.

The last scene added absolutely nothing to the movie and was 100% white murder pr0n. Nothing more and nothing less. Disgusting.

Oscar noms are weird that way, because a films legacy takes years to build. And also, its comparing to films made in that year, not all films all time. I don't see a nomination that I'm like, "why did Sinners get that over something else?"

TCTTS said:

---

Coogler clearly hates racist white people, yes, but obviously not white people in general. To that end, it's weird how some of y'all's complaints are basically implying that either all white people are racist, or you're offended that blatant, murderous racists are being killed, when neither is a good look. In other words, it's not "white murder porn," it's "racist murder porn," yet some of you keep insisting on interlinking the two, as if they can't be mutually exclusive. All clearly for the sole purpose of needing to be offended on the internet.

---

You might have a point if we didn't spend the 2010's and the early 2020's being told that all white people are racist by people like Robin DiAngelo, Ta-Nehisi Coates, and a myriad of other authors, activists, and academics who created an entire cottage industry around diversity and white guilt. It's not an implication coming from anyone critical of the movie, it's an indictment of the decade or so of DEI messaging using the two almost interchangeably.

That's a fair point, but also… context clues matter, and all black people don't share the same, militant opinions. It's like… y'all get mad that the movie is apparently stereotyping, but then your reaction is to stereotype in return. Instead, do just a tiny bit of homework first, rather than immediately going straight to offended, I'll-informed outrage, which this board is of course notorious for.

Holy **** now that is gold. If only we could be as grounded and informed as the theater kid. You wear that California well my friend.

Ah, yes. Never mind that I'm from Texas, go home all the time, grew up playing every sport under the sun, have never acted in my life, and am posting on a college football message board. But because I think it's dumb and performative to accuse Ryan Coogler of hating white people, that makes me a "California theater kid." You're just full of cliched stereotypes, aren't you?

Mr. White said:

---

Does it deserve to be the film with the most Oscar nominations ever?

---

Absolutely not

TCTTS said:

---

That's a fair point, but also… context clues matter, and all black people don't share the same, militant opinions. It's like… y'all get mad that the movie is apparently stereotyping, but then your reaction is to stereotype in return. Instead, do just a tiny bit of homework first, rather than immediately going straight to offended, I'll-informed outrage, which this board is of course notorious for.

---

The conveyance of themes and messages is the responsibility of the sender. If people misinterpret it, that's on the creator for being ambiguous, not the receiver for interpreting in their own personal context and experience.

As for context clues... Your opinion is that Coogler specifically hates racist whites because that's a fairly literal interpretation of the film. Interpreting it symbolically, it's easy to draw the conclusion that these white vampires are symbolic of white people in general, not just the racist ones.

Not only have we been browbeaten with the idea that all whites are racist, but we have been repeatedly told that white culture is based on cultural and intellectual theft and appropriation, as well as oppression and exploitation. When prominent black voices in academia and print spend the better part of a decade declaring white synonymous with racist and that white people have established themselves by sucking other cultures dry and lording over them, it's very hard not to draw a comparison when a prominent black filmmaker makes a movie about a group of black entrepreneurs facing off against white vampires.

Remmick's offer of immortality and freedom from persecution for joining him, as well as his offers to trade peace for Sammie and his musical talents, are also clearly an allegory for the temptation (or insistence) to abandon or sell out black culture and identity in favor of "whiteness" in order to fit into white society. These aren't just white racists, they're an embodiment of a common, racist view of white people in general.

And that's not a stereotype against Coogler, it's a valid interpretation of his work in the context of recent history.

Quote:

---

Not only have we been browbeaten with the idea that all whites are racist, but we have been repeatedly told that white culture is based on cultural and intellectual theft and appropriation, as well as oppression and exploitation. When prominent black voices in academia and print spend the better part of a decade declaring white synonymous with racist and that white people have established themselves by sucking other cultures dry and lording over them, it's very hard not to draw a comparison when a prominent black filmmaker makes a movie about a group of black entrepreneurs facing off against white vampires.

Remmick's offer of immortality and freedom from persecution for joining him, as well as his offers to trade peace for Sammie and his musical talents, are also clearly an allegory for the temptation (or insistence) to abandon or sell out black culture and identity in favor of "whiteness" in order to fit into white society. These aren't just white racists, they're an embodiment of a common, racist view of white people in general.

---

And?

Certain white people WERE racist toward blacks in the south.

Certain white people DID appropriate black music.

Those things inarguably happened, they weren't edge cases either, and it's perfectly fine if someone wants to make a movie that explores those themes/grievances.

In return, it seems what you're essentially saying is that Coogler shouldn't critique *some* white people without bending over backwards to assure/coddle white audiences that he's not talking about *all* white people.

While I'm trying to argue A) that message is ALREADY obvious within the context of the filmmaking itself, for anyone who cares to look, and B) it would be terrible storytelling/art to go out of his way to underline that point any further, especially for white audiences.

In other words, Coogler is trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, yet it's obvious some of you are hellbent on proving him wrong/needing to be offended/outraged by it. You're complaining that "all white people" are being depicted unfairly... while accusing Coogler of being just like every other angry black person. How do you not see that you're doing the exact same thing you're accusing him of?

Quote:

---

The conveyance of themes and messages is the responsibility of the sender. If people misinterpret it, that's on the creator for being ambiguous, not the receiver for interpreting in their own personal context and experience.

---

This is like the opposite of what any art form is.

Certain things are absolutely made for specific audiences, but the point of art (and especially good art) is exactly that people interpret it in different ways based on their own personal context and experience.