Films like this make me kinda nervous as far as writing what I actually think about them. Yeah, there’s my previously-mentioned insecurity when it comes to discussing stories and ideas connected to Black cultures, which I genuinely think I’ve dropped the ball on around here a number of times, but there’s also the historical side of things as well. Long before this film saw release over here in Australia, it came under heavy controversy for its historical inaccuracies, to the extent that it airbrushed the involvement of Dahomey, the West African nation that the film is centred on, in the Atlantic slave trade.
Now, whenever dealing with films based on historical events, I tend to lean on the side of “this is a film, not a documentary” when processing what’s on-screen. I often feel like I’m stretching my abilities when talking cinema as is (hello imposter syndrome, my old friend), let alone feigning knowledge about history that I do not possess, outside of some light Googling out of sheer curiosity; this should not be mistaken for a lengthy education on such things. Between that and the regularity with which cinema, particularly in the mainstream, glosses over the messier parts of the subject matter, I don’t feel comfortable judging it on those standards. I especially don’t like the idea of a film like this being put under some ‘model minority’ scrutiny bollocks, where it’s expected to do better than those whose diversions tend to fly under the radar more times than not.
So, what I’m going to do with this film is to discuss it and analyse it as is. While I have done a bit of looking-into concerning the real-world history being shown (and yes, it is a lot to deal with), I am only going to be talking about what is in the film itself. Partly because of my aforementioned reluctance about judging films on anything greater than that, but also because I’m hoping to surprise at least one reader as far as what is actually in the film that everyone and their dog(whistle) is talking about.
Coming from the director and stunt team behind the fantastic Old Guard, I expected nothing less than brilliance as far as the action scenes, and brilliance is what they deliver. Equally swift and brutal, while squeaking in at an M rating, the swordplay, fist fights, and even wraparound wrestling on display is quite invigorating.
Ditto for the characters doing the battling, starting with Viola Davis as Nanisca, the titular King. In past roles like Amanda Waller, Rose, and Ma Rainey, she has consistently shown a commanding presence over pretty much everyone else in the same room as her, but that effect is pushed even further here. In every scene, her frame says “I will absolutely fuck your shit up” while her face says “Nothing will get in the way of me fucking your shit up”. Even when she’s more vulnerable, particularly when opposite Thuso Mbedu as initiate Nawi, there’s never a sense that that strength is being given up in order for that emotionality to come through.
That’s something that’s reinforced by the dialogue as well, the notion that ‘vulnerability’ and ‘weakness’ aren’t the same thing, and from there, it creates a sturdy foundation for its more feminist leanings in how it contrasts the mindsets and methods of the sexes. Set in the middle of the slave trade (complete with Hardin himself Hero Fiennes-Tiffin as a Portuguese slaver), it emphasises the agency of women as part of the subjugation going on, comparing man’s treatment of others as property and woman’s treatment of others as equals.
As for the slavery angle itself, the text of the film is heavily concerned with the notion of displacement, starting with the slave trade and growing out from there. It actively points out that Ghevo was involved with the trade, with many other characters have been affected by it in turn, and while it doesn’t check his actions as hard as it should have, it’s not as if the film is completely ignoring that part of the story. And in the intersection of Black Africans being made into property by those within and without, and women outside of the Agojie dealing with similar treatment, it explicitly points at displacement from people, land, and culture as tragic and damaging. It even pulls Nanisca herself into the equation through a particularly intense subplot to show that it doesn’t take the extreme of slavery for the trauma of that displacement to take root.
So… yeah, for whatever my opinion on this may be worth, this isn’t the kind of slavery apologia I was initially worried about from all the controversy. It may treat those involved in the slave trade on the Dahomey side with less sharpness than the blades in the action scenes, but the event isn’t being brought up out of obligation to what it’s attached to. Rather, it helps make sense of why this particular moment in history, tweaked as it is, is being used to build this film off of. Its strongest moments come not from the action scenes, but from its examination of the emotional and psychological effects of displacement and loss of cultural identity. There’s nuance to the characters that make them engaging beyond the action scenes, and it helps smooth over some of the potentially unsettling dimensions of the subject matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment