MovieChat Forums > Fire and Ice (1983) Discussion > Racist?

Racist?

posted 17 years ago by mattslittlebrother
45 replies | jump to latest

I'm just throwing this out there to see what others opinions are.

All I'm saying is the "subhumans" seemed like a weird mix of the old view of black "savages" and gorillas and seemed to play upon (intentionally or not) the idea that black people are less evolved than white people. Maybe I am too sensitive about this stuff. I loved the movie! Loved it! But that kinda made me uncomfortable.

However, I would be surprised if the same man who directed the satirical "Coonskin" would intentionally make a racist film unless there was some kinda point to it.

[–] osufanid 13 years ago

I just watched it, and two things struck me. First, it is very racist, and all green people around the world should take offense. Also, since they are obviously neanderthals and not more evolved humans, any surviving unevolved pre-humans (don't want to say sub-human and have offense taken) should be upset and probably protest the Netflix headquarters until they stop providing this movie in their streaming section.

[–] Humanophage 13 years ago

This aspect actually makes the film closer in spirit to Howard's Conan than the large amount of watered-down barbarian films and books. The image of a civilised race falling victim to another human race which is much less developed and hence "sub-human" is very fitting. The association of these sub-humans with real human groups wasn't uncommon either, e.g., Lovecraft's Inuto.

However, I wouldn't say the sub-humans in Fire & Ice seemed similar to any actual human race, actually. I think they bore a striking semblance to Soviets from Nazi propaganda, and conform more to the generalised depictions of enemies by European powers than to anything related to race. I.e., the "Destroy this mad brute" poster, Russians from "Humoristische Karte von Europe", etc.

[–] Dream_Demon 13 years ago

Personally, Nekron's minions physically reminded more of the Picts from Robert Howard's stories (without any makeup though) and Frazetta's version of beast men (it should be noted that they came from a COLD environment. Maybe their "dark skin" is actually hair covering their entire body). Personality-wise, they were nothing more than dumb brutes (Actual cavemen are much smarter, more creative, and certainly LESS NOISY than these savages). Culture-wise, asides from being slaves to Nekron, they seem to be simply nothing more but wildmen (outcasts perhaps?) who have no sense of culture to them at all (no religion, no respect towards the dead, etc.) other than one female who is dressed like a shaman of sorts.

As for what kind of human they are, they are definitely some sort of primitive, but are not neanderthals nor cro-magnons. The minions may be closer to some line of human that predates the two.

Note: Neanderthals are not less "evolved" than cro-magnons. They are two separate human races, and evolution has to do with adaptation, not superiority. For example, the Kaua'i cave wolf spider from Hawaii is more "evolved" than the species of wolf spider that it evolved from, but it's blind and had adapted to be more suited for surviving in a cave than any other environment. Get what I'm saying?

Welcome to my Nightmare- Freddy Krueger

[–] counter_tre 12 years ago

It's kind of hard not to make the negative connection -- they are dark skinned, rendered in sort of a African/Native American/caveman combo-look, dumb/primitive, savage, evil and...what for it...they go do so far as to call them "sub-humans"! It's got to be the most negative characterization in the history of animation, maybe film altogether.

Sure, they are greenish brown, not brown...LOL. I love the movie; I have since I first say it 20 years ago. I like to give it the benefit of the doubt and think that the palette was limited. However, we all know that if someone off the street watched it today and say the "sub-humans", they would say "WTF?"

BTW, do you think Teegra looked like that in real life? Damn...

[–] glenmusher 12 years ago

I don't think the movie is racist.Thought never crossed my mind, but I suppose if your looking for something to conform to your prejudices you will always find some way of making it seem so, like looking for a face in a cloud formation.

Everything will be OK in the end, if it aint OK,it aint the end.

[–] sanctuary_thirteen 9 years ago

It's SUPER racist.

And the Orcs in Tolkien are as well.

Are they as overt as Birth of a Nation? No. But they're just as insidious. Cro-Magnon and Neanderthals do not show those sort of morphological traits, the subhumans are more in line with the concepts of phrenology and white superiority.

[–] chrisdaco2 9 years ago

I just watched this flick again not to long ago and I have to wonder what kind of people would see black or African characteristics in the sub species creatures? There is no similarity at all. Definitely an apelike aspect as in most depictions of cavemen but nothing either African or Anglo at all. Also the bad guy wasn't just White he was REALLY WHITE!

"Sorry I'm late guys. I was taking a crap."
Paul Newman

[–] Duncan_Idaho02 8 years ago

The obligatory see racism where there is none thread.

[–] osualdo 8 years ago

WTFWTFWTF? RACISM AGAIN? OH,NO!

These guys who see racism in THIS masterpiece must be trolling or been dropped on their head.
______________________
You Sir. Are an idiot.

[–] Stenian 8 years ago

Their design is based on early humans. Early humans had a more "apey" look to them, if you didn't know that.

You're the racist to equate them with black people. It's rather ironic.

Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months.