Black Americans on Iwo...

[Larry Gude]

http://film.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/Guardian/0,,1928009,00.html

The failure to transfer the active role played by African-Americans at Iwo Jima to the big screen does not surprise him. "One of the marines I interviewed said that the people who were filming newsreel footage on Iwo Jima deliberately turned their cameras away when black folks came by. Blacks are not surprised at all when they see movies set where black troops were engaged and never show on the screen. I would like to say that it was from ignorance but anybody can do research and come up with books about African-Americans in world war two. I think it has to do with box office and what producers of movies think Americans really want to see."

"It would take only a couple of extras and everyone would be happy," she said. "No one's asking for them to be the stars of the movies, but at least show that they were there. This is the way a new generation will think about Iwo Jima. Once again it will be that African-American people did not serve, that we were absent. It's a lie."

Yvonne Latty, a New York University professor and author of We Were There: Voices of African-American Veterans (2004), wrote to Eastwood and the film's producers pleading with them to include the experience of black soldiers. HarperCollins, the book's publishers, sent the director a copy, but never heard back.

The first chapter to James Bradley's book Flags of Our Fathers, which forms the basis of the movie, opens with a quotation from president Harry Truman. "The only thing new in the world is the history you don't know." It would provide a fitting endnote to Eastwood's film.

I have a strong appreciation for the 'get over it and move on' mindset, but, stuff like this does serve to make you face just how deep slaverys stain is.

On all of us.

 

[Pete]

Very true, it is shameful the way their contribution to society was largely ignored. Makes you wonder IF their contribution in America's most darkest times had been heralded correctly would the 60's civil rights movement been needed? Would that have changed the paradigm blacks were viewed and caused a significant socio-economic place in modern America?

IE: If black Americans had been viewed in the light they deserved free of prejudice beginning in the 1940's (even before during the WWI period) Would their lot in today's society include so many living in poverty? So many disadvantaged?
Things that make you go Hmmmmmmm.

 

[Kyle]

Twenty years before my time... I have no responsibility.

 

[Larry Gude]

That is a GREAT...

Very true, it is shameful the way their contribution to society was largely ignored. Makes you wonder IF their contribution in America's most darkest times had been heralded correctly would the 60's civil rights movement been needed? Would that have changed the paradigm blacks were viewed and caused a significant socio-economic place in modern America?
IE: If black Americans had been viewed in the light they deserved free of prejudice beginning in the 1940's (even before during the WWI period) Would their lot in today's society include so many living in poverty? So many disadvantaged?
Things that make you go Hmmmmmmm.

...GREAT point.

 

[Pete]

...GREAT point.

Every once in a while I have those.

 

[Larry Gude]

No...

Twenty years before my time... I have no responsibility.

...it's not yours, nor mine BUT understanding where someone is coming from is a great step towards the kind of society I think we all hope to be some day.

 

[Nupe2]

Interesting posts...also wonder what this country would be like if the advances by African Americans during Reconstruction had not been derailed by the Compromise of 1877.

 

[Nupe2]

...it's not yours, nor mine BUT understanding where someone is coming from is a great step towards the kind of society I think we all hope to be some day.

....and not just here in America either....but that's another thread.

 

[dustin]

Eastwood is a racist!




(you heard it first, here, on somd.com)

 

[vraiblonde]

I wonder why, though? Do you suppose Clint Eastwood actively said, "No blacks allowed" when he was casting the movie? That doesn't seem likely to me, but who knows?

Because racism isn't a part of my life, I don't notice the absence or presence of blacks. If I were casting a movie, it's feasible that I'd make a movie with exclusively white people or exclusively black people and not even notice I'd done it until someone pointed it out. If their race isn't pertinent to the story, there's no reason to consider it when casting.

But I'm not a movie maker because attention to detail isn't my strong suit, so I'd be interested in hearing Clint Eastwood's response to this. You'd think he'd be a little more historically accurate when making a (duh) historical movie.

 

[Larry Gude]

Time Out...

Eastwood is a racist!




(you heard it first, here, on somd.com)

...I'm not alledging that or even hinting at, allow be to be clear on that.

 

[Pete]

Interesting posts...also wonder what this country would be like if the advances by African Americans during Reconstruction had not been derailed by the Compromise of 1877.

You think it would have created a more "open mindset" in white America regarding black Americans in 1877 if Democrats had caused a constitutional crisis? As it is it ended reconstruction and caused the south to be a Democrat lock for nearly 100 years after.

Not disagreeing with you just wondering your viewpoint. I am inclined to think that if Democrats had prevailed and forced civil rights measures it would have caused even greater animosity among whites.

 

[Larry Gude]

A great part about America...

Interesting posts...also wonder what this country would be like if the advances by African Americans during Reconstruction had not been derailed by the Compromise of 1877.

...is that we fought our civil war to decide, once and for all, if we truly were a people endowed with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

A bad part about us is that we had to fight that war.

The repercussions, good and bad, have taken time, just as the war itself was four score and seven years after we initially declared what we are.

Another great point though.

 

[Pete]

...is that we fought our civil war to decide, once and for all, if we truly were a people endowed with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

A bad part about us is that we had to fight that war.

The repercussions, good and bad, have taken time, just as the war itself was four score and seven years after we initially declared what we are.

Another great point though.

It's sad that we had to fight a war that killed 1 million Americans and then it took 100 years to impliment any significant change.

Other than being bought and sold, they were still held in virtual slavery.

 

[aps45819]

...is that we fought our civil war to decide, once and for all, if we truly were a people endowed with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
.

The civil war was more about State's right instead of individual's rights. Lincoln freed the slaves in only the states that had suceeded from the union.

 

[dustin]

I wonder why, though? Do you suppose Clint Eastwood actively said, "No blacks allowed" when he was casting the movie? That doesn't seem likely to me, but who knows?

Because racism isn't a part of my life, I don't notice the absence or presence of blacks. If I were casting a movie, it's feasible that I'd make a movie with exclusively white people or exclusively black people and not even notice I'd done it until someone pointed it out. If their race isn't pertinent to the story, there's no reason to consider it when casting.

But I'm not a movie maker because attention to detail isn't my strong suit, so I'd be interested in hearing Clint Eastwood's response to this. You'd think he'd be a little more historically accurate when making a (duh) historical movie.

He's probably just a big dummy that believes everything he sees in movies.

 

[Bustem' Down]

Saw it last night...

Was still a great movie.

 

[Pete]

I wonder why, though? Do you suppose Clint Eastwood actively said, "No blacks allowed" when he was casting the movie? That doesn't seem likely to me, but who knows?

Because racism isn't a part of my life, I don't notice the absence or presence of blacks. If I were casting a movie, it's feasible that I'd make a movie with exclusively white people or exclusively black people and not even notice I'd done it until someone pointed it out. If their race isn't pertinent to the story, there's no reason to consider it when casting.

But I'm not a movie maker because attention to detail isn't my strong suit, so I'd be interested in hearing Clint Eastwood's response to this. You'd think he'd be a little more historically accurate when making a (duh) historical movie.

Oliver Stone doesn't worry about silly things like accuracy. :shrug:

 

[Bustem' Down]

Oliver Stone doesn't worry about silly things like accuracy. :shrug:

That's true. One look at the fleet and

 

[ylexot]

I think the reason that there weren't any blacks in the movie is because it was filmed in Greenland or Iceland (I forget which) and they used locals for all the extras...I'm thinking there are not many blacks there. So, I don't think it has anything to do with racism and a whole lot more to do with logistics.