Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When I suggest to my friends that we could watch a movie like District 9 or The Last Samurai, they say they don't want to watch those movies cause they are white savior movies. I had to look up that term as I was unfamiliar with it, but it seems to be growing pretty popular now, after looking it up. But why are white savior stories bad really?
Isn't the white savior ideal more dramatic and powerful in the sense, that since the white race has colonized so many areas of the world, that it makes it more accessible to have a white hero turning against their own people? That way you have a dramatic betrayal, instead of a total 100% of us vs. them philosophy.
I mean if in To Kill A Mockingbird for example of Atticus Finch was a black attorney, I think the story would have actually been worse, cause then no white person sees what is right then, and it's too black and white then, pardon the unintentional pun.
Does that make sense?
And the theme of stories like District 9, Avatar, Dances with Wolves, or The Last Samurai is how not everyone in the race of villains is going to see things there way. So I think it's a powerful theme, but for some reason, the movies are giving a bad rep cause of this 'white savior' stigma.
But what do you think? Do I have a point, or would movies be better off if it was one race against another, and there were no betrayals at all?
I know you are young and live in Canada. Surely you are not this naive about racism and race relations.
None of the complaints are about drama or white people turning against their own kind.
The issue is with the perpetuation of the idea that all people of color around the globe are so deficient that it takes a white person to save them.
The Mockingbird example is not really a good example since that is more a function of Black lawyers not being able to practice law in the white dominated legal system. Yes, there were Black lawyers back then.
A better example is Great Wall with Matt Damon. All those Chinese people and it took a white outsider to come save them?
After seeing these same narratives for years, it leaks into the cultural psyche that people of color are always deficient and white people are superior. People of color can't solve their own issues. They need saving like children.
And the theme of stories like District 9, Avatar, Dances with Wolves, or The Last Samurai is how not everyone in the race of villains is going to see things there way. So I think it's a powerful theme, but for some reason, the movies are giving a bad rep cause of this 'white savior' stigma.
But what do you think? Do I have a point, or would movies be better off if it was one race against another, and there were no betrayals at all?
District 9 isn't a "white savior" film.
The Last Samurai is a fish-out-of-water story. The protagonist's captors give him the chance to prove himself and he subsequently chooses to ally himself with them against an invading force that is akin to a virus infecting a cell. Not a "white savior" story.
Avatar is indeed a "magic whitey" fairy tale, and that's why it sucks.
After seeing these same narratives for years, it leaks into the cultural psyche that people of color are always deficient and white people are superior. People of color can't solve their own issues. They need saving like children.
That's the problem.
Yup.
But to be fair to the original point, some commentators are getting overly sensitive about this. They are seeing it where it doesn't exist. Case in point: https://www.tor.com/2019/03/06/why-i...ior-narrative/Why It’s Important to Consider Whether Dune Is a White Savior Narrative
when the white savior is a black guy, hes the "magical negro." (not my term, comes from the same critics as white savior.)
definitely not as glamorous, rather than bringing sophistication and civilisation, he usually brings simple, no-bull**** wisdom and kindness.
in frasier, the magical negro was the leads aging white father. dodged a bullet there, but now your entire cast is white! but be careful with your hero figures, someone always has a problem with them. my only problem with captain marvel is that your choices are "bigot" or "fan" and i dont play that sort of game.
never had a problem with wonder woman being a woman-- dont know enough about marvel (honestly never cared about captain america) to care what the implications of the captains title and rank are-- do care about being insulted preemptively and collectively if i dont shell out money for a film. still have nothing against the character. not interested in the film. but i wasnt interested in the film before, either. marvel has loads of characters i dont care about-- all they do by insulting fans is give me one more reason to do what i was going to anyway.
if you feel insulted by a film, whether its got a black hero, a white one, or a female one-- id advise you to do whatever you want to do. but the way we are constantly being told what our opinions should be-- im not such a fan of that. if it werent so one-sided and dishonest a lot of the time, it wouldnt be so unwelcome. why its important? only the left can see every aspect of a fantasy as a crisis. the right simply says "not interested" but the left has a problem with that, too.
"why dune is plusungood, and not watching captain marvel is doubleplusungood"
When I suggest to my friends that we could watch a movie like District 9 or The Last Samurai, they say they don't want to watch those movies cause they are white savior movies. I had to look up that term as I was unfamiliar with it, but it seems to be growing pretty popular now, after looking it up. But why are white savior stories bad really?
Isn't the white savior ideal more dramatic and powerful in the sense, that since the white race has colonized so many areas of the world, that it makes it more accessible to have a white hero turning against their own people? That way you have a dramatic betrayal, instead of a total 100% of us vs. them philosophy.
I mean if in To Kill A Mockingbird for example of Atticus Finch was a black attorney, I think the story would have actually been worse, cause then no white person sees what is right then, and it's too black and white then, pardon the unintentional pun.
Does that make sense?
And the theme of stories like District 9, Avatar, Dances with Wolves, or The Last Samurai is how not everyone in the race of villains is going to see things there way. So I think it's a powerful theme, but for some reason, the movies are giving a bad rep cause of this 'white savior' stigma.
But what do you think? Do I have a point, or would movies be better off if it was one race against another, and there were no betrayals at all?
Because while people are bad to the social justice warrior crowd that's they they think these movies are bad. It's because this country is obsessed with race and has this quota bull**** with everything.
I know you are young and live in Canada. Surely you are not this naive about racism and race relations.
None of the complaints are about drama or white people turning against their own kind.
The issue is with the perpetuation of the idea that all people of color around the globe are so deficient that it takes a white person to save them.
The Mockingbird example is not really a good example since that is more a function of Black lawyers not being able to practice law in the white dominated legal system. Yes, there were Black lawyers back then.
A better example is Great Wall with Matt Damon. All those Chinese people and it took a white outsider to come save them?
After seeing these same narratives for years, it leaks into the cultural psyche that people of color are always deficient and white people are superior. People of color can't solve their own issues. They need saving like children.
That's the problem.
Well I thought with these movies where a white main character betrays his own people made a more powerful statement, than just one all good race, against one all bad race. The white character betraying his or her own people to join the other side, allows for more grey areas, and more nuances, that you don't get with a pure black and white battle (no pun intended). Does that make sense or am I wrong?
I know you are young and live in Canada. Surely you are not this naive about racism and race relations.
None of the complaints are about drama or white people turning against their own kind.
The issue is with the perpetuation of the idea that all people of color around the globe are so deficient that it takes a white person to save them.
The Mockingbird example is not really a good example since that is more a function of Black lawyers not being able to practice law in the white dominated legal system. Yes, there were Black lawyers back then.
A better example is Great Wall with Matt Damon. All those Chinese people and it took a white outsider to come save them?
After seeing these same narratives for years, it leaks into the cultural psyche that people of color are always deficient and white people are superior. People of color can't solve their own issues. They need saving like children.
That's the problem.
Well, then please tell me what is the point of Live Aid? Sure, multiple races were trying to help the famine, but it was a white man on MTV that organized the whole thing, and it was probably mostly white people who were donating their money to help the cause. Sadly, the money would never get to where it needed to go because the non white warlords of the region hijacked the money and used it to feed and supply their armies.
And your assumption that all people of color around the globe is a little bit over exaggerated, but when you step back, why is it the non white's of the world are either migrating to white dominated countries, or welcoming the likes of China, Europe, USA or Canada with open arms when those countries promise charity and infrastructure?
Just going through history, no doubt, white man has caused terrible crimes throughout the world, but let's not pretend they are the only ones given the history of the conquering going on with ancient China, African barbs and radical Islam. But, I will note, white people have also fought for the freedoms for everyone throughout the world, but when white people were being attacked and enslaved by the Moors, or fighting a massive war against Hitler, I can't recall any non white countries coming to help despite the fact that if Hitler had won, those very same countries would be in trouble. I do find it interesting, Japan took allegiance to Hitler. I guess they liked the idea of Nazi's being the ideal world leaders.
Yep that's true, I thought the white savior story was powerful cause it has a white guy betraying his own fellow aggressors to help out a group of people being persecuted against.
But there are times in history when it wasn't just the whites that are the aggressors, but it seems no one wants to make the movies a lot of the time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
