MovieChat Forums > Ranb > Replies
Ranb's Replies
The racial stuff in the movie was sugar coated for the most part. Read the book. While Katherine Johnson did not bother seeking out a colored ladies room, other black women did. The book goes into detail about Mary Jackson's anger over the bathroom issue.
You sound upset. It is just a movie based upon the book. Read the book, it is very educational. It goes into details about the computors (black and white) who contributed to the space program.
Based on the book Hidden Figures and actual history I've read, things were much worse for African-Americans than depicted in the movie. There is no reason you need to feel shamed by anything in the movie.
I'm fairly certain that "the black community" isn't naive and stupid enough to think that this movie was anything to get excited about regarding the racist history of the United States.
The movie sugar coated the racism that existed back then. The book goes into great detail about the racism that was rife in in NACA/NASA and Virginia.
According to the book;
Katherine said she was not exposed to much in the way of racism while at NASA. She did not bother to search for a black ladies room after she found out she was using the white restrooms in the building she worked in. It was Mary Jackson who was mocked by her female co-workers when she asked where the colored ladies room was. The book also went into detail about the "mask" Mary and other blacks wore when dealing with whites. It was Mary who lost her temper with her boss which ended up advancing her career when he offered her a promotion.
The book also went into detail about other racism in NASA at the time and the extreme measures the state took to ensure black and white kids were not educated together. The movie was a light and fluffy puff piece of entertainment compared to the book.
Maul,
You act like a SJW flipping your shit.
It was an interesting movie to say the least.
It was a satire of a popular book. Fans of the book probably wanted to see a faithful adaptation of the book.
I thought it was a poor war movie. The soldiers for the most part seemed to be cannon fodder who could hardly be bothered to use the sights on their rifles. Sending ground troops in without air support is stupid. Lots of goofy crap in the movie.
I agree about the problem with child actors. I still think that at 5"10" and 24 years old, Timothee Chalamet is not a good actor to play Paul. I do hope they make a good movie though.
Hahaha, I agree. But in the book Rita was described as a short skinny flat chested redhead. One of the soldiers said she looked like puppy.
"But her character has ZERO will to live,"
This was another thing from the book they left out of the screenplay. Rita devoted herself to destroying all of the mimics after she saw her family and town slaughtered by the mimics. Her only possession was a coffee service. Her special forces company pretty much existed to back her up while she was mopping up mimics after an air strike. In the book, Rita's motivations were very clear, in the film, not so much.
I've read the original screenplay of the film; it stuck rather close to the book. I'm guessing that someone decided Tom Cruise needed to be on the screen a lot more, as in almost every scene. The book was rather short at 230 pages and 58,000 words. There was no reason to make the film Rita so much less influential, famous and inspiring than the Rita of the book.
The original novel is not trash, it is actually a good read. When I said that Edge of Tomorrow was like Starship Troopers, I was only saying that they were both very poor adaptations of the source material. So not a compliment.
That you don't have the slightest idea how to identify an anchor baby. It seems having a foreign born mother is how you do it. Everyone else understands what an anchor baby is why don't you?
Here are some flaws.
1. They should have followed the excellent source material instead of "Starship Troopering" it.
2. The sappy zero-body-count ending.
For someone who did not read the book, it was a strange quirky movie. For anyone who did read the book, it was a very poor adaptation indeed.
Oh, the benefit of the doubt. I'm sure that is nice coming from a person who doesn't have the slightest clue as to how a person can legally gain entry into the USA. :)
Then what is your definition of an anchor baby? It normally means a child born to a non-citizen mother in a country that has birthright citizenship which will help the mother and other family gain legal residency.
The script says nothing about Marta being a natural born citizen. She could have immigrated like many others and provided a place for her family to stay.
I think your prejudice is clouding your ability to reason
More likely it was to avoid being associated with other races as much as possible.
Where in the script did it say Marta was an anchor baby?
Why do you think Marta is an anchor baby? It doesn't say that in the film. As a nurse Marta could have entered the counry legally and then obtained citizenship.