Review of Panther

Panther (I) (1995)
revisionist history, and badly done at that
9 February 2000
Warning: Spoilers
Revisionism of the sort trowelled out by the makers of "Panther" would be laughable if it weren't for the possibility that someone somewhere might take it seriously. The main point of the movie, made by the otherwise modestly talented Mario Van Peebles, is that the Black Panthers were just a bunch of do gooders being oppressed by a dictatorial government after having the temerity to stand up for their rights.

The movie is not without its sardonic side -- at one point (not much of a spoiler, still -- SPOILER -- just to be cautious) the early Panthers start selling books written by the Chinese Chairman Mao, mass murderer, worse than Hitler, to make money so they can buy guns. And who do they sell them too? Foolish white college kids -- it is sort of funny and ironic, black radicals selling a murderous communist book to phony revolutionary white upper class kids in a perfectly acceptable capitalist free market way to fund the purchase of weapons. It's sort of a hoot.

Still, you don't see their participation in their murder of an accountant who found problems with their bookkeeping, or the general mentality of Eldridge Cleaver who has said he has delighted in raping women and found it a politically liberating experience. The movie also gives credence to the idea that somehow the U.S. government purposely shipped massive amounts of cocaine into inner city neighborhoods in a conscious attempt to destroy minority communities--a laughable contention thoroughly at odds with the facts. The movie is such a shameless example of extremist pablum that it is easy to laugh at, but hard to completely dismiss since someone somewhere might take this for history.
7 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed